(08-15-2013 03:50 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:45 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  I'm sure Delany, although he would never publicly admit it, mentioned hey join now we may get you Virginia or UNC or Duke here in a couple of years. The first step is for you to leave and the dominos will fall.

I suspect as much. I wonder if Maryland had a moment of regret when no one followed them, let alone missed them.

But honestly, I don't think it mattered in the least. They were in a hole, and needed the B1G to get out, and that's all that was going to matter.

Thing is, the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Maryland's problems are from the lack of donor support, lack of fan support, and gross mismanagement by the University overall. The tax payers of Maryland have the right to be highly pissed at this cluster *uck! What makes this so bad is Maryland has had the benefit of having access to ACC and BCS monies!

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:50 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:45 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  I'm sure Delany, although he would never publicly admit it, mentioned hey join now we may get you Virginia or UNC or Duke here in a couple of years. The first step is for you to leave and the dominos will fall.

I suspect as much. I wonder if Maryland had a moment of regret when no one followed them, let alone missed them.

But honestly, I don't think it mattered in the least. They were in a hole, and needed the B1G to get out, and that's all that was going to matter.

Thing is, the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:50 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:45 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  I'm sure Delany, although he would never publicly admit it, mentioned hey join now we may get you Virginia or UNC or Duke here in a couple of years. The first step is for you to leave and the dominos will fall.

I suspect as much. I wonder if Maryland had a moment of regret when no one followed them, let alone missed them.

But honestly, I don't think it mattered in the least. They were in a hole, and needed the B1G to get out, and that's all that was going to matter.

Thing is, the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

This is what it all boils down to....what exactly is SIGNIFICANT? Is it 10-15 mil per team or is it 3-5 mil per team? How much more will the B1G make?

(08-15-2013 05:20 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  ...the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

This is what it all boils down to....what exactly is SIGNIFICANT? Is it 10-15 mil per team or is it 3-5 mil per team? How much more will the B1G make?

I've seen max & min ranging from a max of an extra $10M per year down to a min less than what the B1G is making without Maryland & Rutgers... I assume actual falls in between, but folks who are sure that the B1G takes 2 bad sports programs and nets a huge increase in revenue are putting faith in every word from Delaney's mouth... perhaps some do the same w.r.t. Swofford as well, but so far the known facts are that the leagues are fairly close in revenue. Everything else is speculation and reading tea leaves.

If MD was only $6 million in the hole before the ACC withheld the partial payment on the $53 million they owe the ACC ($15 million), then surely they could have made that amount up by staying in the ACC. ESPN is going to bump the contract up by $2million if there is no true ACCN aren't they? What if the ACC takes the $2 million dollar bump and then forms a pay per view option that pays each ACC school an additional $4 million per year?

Now you have a $6 million dollar add per year that MD didn't factor. What about the bump the ACC members are getting for ND and the addition of Cuse and PITT? I have nothing against MD at all. I want nothing but the best for them. All I want to illustrate is that they underestimated the Power of the ACC. The B1G is good as well. But for them to frame this move as a step "up", is an exaggeration. I'm speaking on both the athletic and educational fronts. For Loh to say they wouldn't have gotten out of the hole they have dug for themselves by staying in the ACC is equivalent to him saying that they haven't made any mistakes.

The ACC didn't put Maryland in the position they are currently in and the B1G is not going to be the cure as to what ails them (though it might sound better).

As a UofL fan I am thankful for the opportunity the ACC has given us. We fought tooth and nail to save the old BigEast and were literally the last man off the ship. Now that we are in the ACC we will do whatever it takes to defend our new home and make it better.

We are proud to be where we are and do not take it for granted. By helping the ACC, UofL will help itself, Maryland just doesn't share the same view.

I think Loh is trying to torch the bridge behind him so the fans don't ask to go back..

(08-15-2013 06:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 05:20 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  ...the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

This is what it all boils down to....what exactly is SIGNIFICANT? Is it 10-15 mil per team or is it 3-5 mil per team? How much more will the B1G make?

I've seen max & min ranging from a max of an extra $10M per year down to a min less than what the B1G is making without Maryland & Rutgers... I assume actual falls in between, but folks who are sure that the B1G takes 2 bad sports programs and nets a huge increase in revenue are putting faith in every word from Delaney's mouth... perhaps some do the same w.r.t. Swofford as well, but so far the known facts are that the leagues are fairly close in revenue. Everything else is speculation and reading tea leaves.

I've always been skeptical of the numbers the B1G is throwing around. I don't see the 10 mil per team difference, but there will be a decent sized one. The problem is the B1G also spends a lot so the revenues are high but expenses are as well. I'd be a little more concerned if the B1G was winning championships with all of the extra money.

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:50 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:45 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  I'm sure Delany, although he would never publicly admit it, mentioned hey join now we may get you Virginia or UNC or Duke here in a couple of years. The first step is for you to leave and the dominos will fall.

I suspect as much. I wonder if Maryland had a moment of regret when no one followed them, let alone missed them.

But honestly, I don't think it mattered in the least. They were in a hole, and needed the B1G to get out, and that's all that was going to matter.

Thing is, the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

Does the Maryland report not take into account a projected new B1G deal? What years did the Maryland report include? Please provide a link to these revenue projections you speak of.

(08-15-2013 08:25 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 06:35 PM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 05:20 PM)jaminandjachin Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  ...the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

This is what it all boils down to....what exactly is SIGNIFICANT? Is it 10-15 mil per team or is it 3-5 mil per team? How much more will the B1G make?

I've seen max & min ranging from a max of an extra $10M per year down to a min less than what the B1G is making without Maryland & Rutgers... I assume actual falls in between, but folks who are sure that the B1G takes 2 bad sports programs and nets a huge increase in revenue are putting faith in every word from Delaney's mouth... perhaps some do the same w.r.t. Swofford as well, but so far the known facts are that the leagues are fairly close in revenue. Everything else is speculation and reading tea leaves.

I've always been skeptical of the numbers the B1G is throwing around. I don't see the 10 mil per team difference, but there will be a decent sized one. The problem is the B1G also spends a lot so the revenues are high but expenses are as well. I'd be a little more concerned if the B1G was winning championships with all of the extra money.

IMO, a lot of the B1G projections are counting on being able to get the same carriage rates in NJ, NY, and MD as they do in Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and so on. That won't happen. I'm sure that the B1G will make more per school than the ACC, but I doubt it will be exceedingly dramatic.

(08-15-2013 08:59 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:50 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:45 PM)westmc9th Wrote:  I'm sure Delany, although he would never publicly admit it, mentioned hey join now we may get you Virginia or UNC or Duke here in a couple of years. The first step is for you to leave and the dominos will fall.

I suspect as much. I wonder if Maryland had a moment of regret when no one followed them, let alone missed them.

But honestly, I don't think it mattered in the least. They were in a hole, and needed the B1G to get out, and that's all that was going to matter.

Thing is, the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

Does the Maryland report not take into account a projected new B1G deal? What years did the Maryland report include? Please provide a link to these revenue projections you speak of.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...index.html

Quote:The University of Maryland stands to make nearly $100 million more in conference revenue by 2020 with its switch from the ACC to the Big Ten, according to projected revenue information presented to the school by Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, SI.com has learned.

Quote:When Maryland joins the Big Ten in 2014, it projects to make more than $12 million more than it would have in the ACC. That projected difference jumps to $19 million annually in 2017 after the Big Ten renegotiates its television contract.

According to the official, Maryland projects to make $32 million when it joins the league for the 2014-15 season, well beyond the ACC's projected payout of $20 million.

Quote:The real jump in projected revenue comes in 2017, after the Big Ten negotiates its new television contract. The Big Ten payout that year projects to $43 million, dwarfing the $24 million the ACC projects to pay out that year.

(08-15-2013 09:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 08:59 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 03:50 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  I suspect as much. I wonder if Maryland had a moment of regret when no one followed them, let alone missed them.

But honestly, I don't think it mattered in the least. They were in a hole, and needed the B1G to get out, and that's all that was going to matter.

Thing is, the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

Does the Maryland report not take into account a projected new B1G deal? What years did the Maryland report include? Please provide a link to these revenue projections you speak of.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...index.html

Quote:The University of Maryland stands to make nearly $100 million more in conference revenue by 2020 with its switch from the ACC to the Big Ten, according to projected revenue information presented to the school by Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, SI.com has learned.

Quote:When Maryland joins the Big Ten in 2014, it projects to make more than $12 million more than it would have in the ACC. That projected difference jumps to $19 million annually in 2017 after the Big Ten renegotiates its television contract.

According to the official, Maryland projects to make $32 million when it joins the league for the 2014-15 season, well beyond the ACC's projected payout of $20 million.

Quote:The real jump in projected revenue comes in 2017, after the Big Ten negotiates its new television contract. The Big Ten payout that year projects to $43 million, dwarfing the $24 million the ACC projects to pay out that year.

Have you read your quotes?

(08-15-2013 09:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 09:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 08:59 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:06 PM)Dasville Wrote:  Thing is, the hole would not have been as deep, and the revenue of the ACC is not going to be all that much different than the B1G, "in the long run"!

Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

Does the Maryland report not take into account a projected new B1G deal? What years did the Maryland report include? Please provide a link to these revenue projections you speak of.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...index.html

Quote:The University of Maryland stands to make nearly $100 million more in conference revenue by 2020 with its switch from the ACC to the Big Ten, according to projected revenue information presented to the school by Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, SI.com has learned.

Quote:When Maryland joins the Big Ten in 2014, it projects to make more than $12 million more than it would have in the ACC. That projected difference jumps to $19 million annually in 2017 after the Big Ten renegotiates its television contract.

According to the official, Maryland projects to make $32 million when it joins the league for the 2014-15 season, well beyond the ACC's projected payout of $20 million.

Quote:The real jump in projected revenue comes in 2017, after the Big Ten negotiates its new television contract. The Big Ten payout that year projects to $43 million, dwarfing the $24 million the ACC projects to pay out that year.

Have you read your quotes?

You asked for revenue projections and I gave them to you. Do you understand now or are you so stupid I need to get the 5 year old next door to draw it out in crayon for you?

In 2017 the B1G projects to be paying out $43 million per school while the ACC projects to be making $24million. If just shy of double the payout isn't significant enough for ya then I guess you win.

Maryland might initially struggle because of the hole they dug themselves into, but they stand a far better chance of digging out a whole lot sooner with far more revenue from the B1G than they would with the revenue from the ACC.

(08-15-2013 09:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 09:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 09:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 08:59 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

Does the Maryland report not take into account a projected new B1G deal? What years did the Maryland report include? Please provide a link to these revenue projections you speak of.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...index.html

Quote:The University of Maryland stands to make nearly $100 million more in conference revenue by 2020 with its switch from the ACC to the Big Ten, according to projected revenue information presented to the school by Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, SI.com has learned.

Quote:When Maryland joins the Big Ten in 2014, it projects to make more than $12 million more than it would have in the ACC. That projected difference jumps to $19 million annually in 2017 after the Big Ten renegotiates its television contract.

According to the official, Maryland projects to make $32 million when it joins the league for the 2014-15 season, well beyond the ACC's projected payout of $20 million.

Quote:The real jump in projected revenue comes in 2017, after the Big Ten negotiates its new television contract. The Big Ten payout that year projects to $43 million, dwarfing the $24 million the ACC projects to pay out that year.

Have you read your quotes?

You asked for revenue projections and I gave them to you. Do you understand now or are you so stupid I need to get the 5 year old next door to draw it out in crayon for you?

In 2017 the B1G projects to be paying out $43 million per school while the ACC projects to be making $24million. If just shy of double the payout isn't significant enough for ya then I guess you win.

Maryland might initially struggle because of the hole they dug themselves into, but they stand a far better chance of digging out a whole lot sooner with far more revenue from the B1G than they would with the revenue from the ACC.

From YOUR link:

Quote:The projected information shows how Maryland could afford its $50 million buyout from the ACC, a fee the school is expected to attempt to reduce through legal action.

I actually have no doubt that this is what Delany told Maryland (again from YOUR link):

Quote:Here's how the financial payout per school breaks down for upcoming years, according to the information Delany relayed to Maryland officials: The school will make $32 million in 2014, $33 million in 2015, $34.5 million in 2016 and then $43 million in 2017.

Those numbers continue to steadily climb, as the Big Ten payout projects to jump to $44 million in 2018 and $45 million in 2019.

Please explain to me how the information you have provided matches up with the information from the report that Loh asked for and is linked to by the OP.

(08-15-2013 09:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 09:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 09:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 08:59 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

Does the Maryland report not take into account a projected new B1G deal? What years did the Maryland report include? Please provide a link to these revenue projections you speak of.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...index.html

Quote:The University of Maryland stands to make nearly $100 million more in conference revenue by 2020 with its switch from the ACC to the Big Ten, according to projected revenue information presented to the school by Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, SI.com has learned.

Quote:When Maryland joins the Big Ten in 2014, it projects to make more than $12 million more than it would have in the ACC. That projected difference jumps to $19 million annually in 2017 after the Big Ten renegotiates its television contract.

According to the official, Maryland projects to make $32 million when it joins the league for the 2014-15 season, well beyond the ACC's projected payout of $20 million.

Quote:The real jump in projected revenue comes in 2017, after the Big Ten negotiates its new television contract. The Big Ten payout that year projects to $43 million, dwarfing the $24 million the ACC projects to pay out that year.

Have you read your quotes?

You asked for revenue projections and I gave them to you. Do you understand now or are you so stupid I need to get the 5 year old next door to draw it out in crayon for you?

In 2017 the B1G projects to be paying out $43 million per school while the ACC projects to be making $24million. If just shy of double the payout isn't significant enough for ya then I guess you win.

Maryland might initially struggle because of the hole they dug themselves into, but they stand a far better chance of digging out a whole lot sooner with far more revenue from the B1G than they would with the revenue from the ACC.

Since you want to pick and chose quotes, here is one from the link by the op:

Quote:Even when Maryland is finally a full Big Ten member, it’s not going to rain money in College Park. For instance, Maryland doesn’t become a full equity partner in the Big Ten Network until July 1, 2020. Because potential TV viewers were what made Maryland attractive to the Big Ten in the first place, that seems onerous,

No idea what you re talking about as I didn't read the link the OP provided because I figured it was yet another blast Maryland for taking action to better their entire athletic department by a bunch of fans of schools who in the last 10 years have done pretty much the same thing Maryland did.

Again, you asked for revenue predictions, I gave them to you. In 2019 the B1G is projected to be making almost double what the ACC is making. How that can be considered a bad thing for Maryland is beyond me.

(08-15-2013 10:10 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  No idea what you re talking about as I didn't read the link the OP provided because I figured it was yet another blast Maryland for taking action to better their entire athletic department by a bunch of fans of schools who in the last 10 years have done pretty much the same thing Maryland did.

Again, you asked for revenue predictions, I gave them to you. In 2019 the B1G is projected to be making almost double what the ACC is making. How that can be considered a bad thing for Maryland is beyond me.

No harm, no foul!

When you get the chance, read the findings of the report President Loh commissioned. It is in the original link from the Washington Post.

(08-15-2013 09:46 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 09:37 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 09:32 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 08:59 PM)Dasville Wrote:  

(08-15-2013 04:34 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Says who? Every revenue prediction of the two conference shows the B1G making significantly more that the ACC on a yearly basis.

Does the Maryland report not take into account a projected new B1G deal? What years did the Maryland report include? Please provide a link to these revenue projections you speak of.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/wr...index.html

Quote:The University of Maryland stands to make nearly $100 million more in conference revenue by 2020 with its switch from the ACC to the Big Ten, according to projected revenue information presented to the school by Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany, SI.com has learned.

Quote:When Maryland joins the Big Ten in 2014, it projects to make more than $12 million more than it would have in the ACC. That projected difference jumps to $19 million annually in 2017 after the Big Ten renegotiates its television contract.

According to the official, Maryland projects to make $32 million when it joins the league for the 2014-15 season, well beyond the ACC's projected payout of $20 million.

Quote:The real jump in projected revenue comes in 2017, after the Big Ten negotiates its new television contract. The Big Ten payout that year projects to $43 million, dwarfing the $24 million the ACC projects to pay out that year.

Have you read your quotes?

You asked for revenue projections and I gave them to you. Do you understand now or are you so stupid I need to get the 5 year old next door to draw it out in crayon for you?

In 2017 the B1G projects to be paying out $43 million per school while the ACC projects to be making $24million. If just shy of double the payout isn't significant enough for ya then I guess you win.

Maryland might initially struggle because of the hole they dug themselves into, but they stand a far better chance of digging out a whole lot sooner with far more revenue from the B1G than they would with the revenue from the ACC.

Those quotes are hilarious. The Maryland report states they don't receive a full share until 2020. This year, the Big Ten payed out $25.8 million per team (the ACC $24.4 million), but MD is going to get $32 million next year despite the fact that they're six years away from a full share? If they were dumb enough to buy (or sell to their constituents) the bull about receiving $100 million more in conference disbursements by 2020 when they won't receive a full share until then, then good grief. I don't know what else to say.

Again, when thinking about those projections, read the comments of actual media analysts talking about how Fox Sports 1 is shooting for an unprecedented 80¢ per subscriber for a new channel when most are at 15¢-50¢...and FS1 actually has real programing to sell, and then think about how cable in NY and the belt way that already carry the BTN for low rates on sports pack tiers are going to feel when asked to pay out exponentially more for the same product with only an additional couple of mediocre MD or Rutgers games added. Imagine the campaign of the BTN trying to rally crazed Terps fans by leveraging the outrage about not seeing MD vs Purdue so as to threaten to switch cable providers like they did in the midwest. Common sense here, people.

If there was legitimately $100 million more to be had over six years, than everyone in the ACC would have been trampling over each other to be the next out the door. MD bought (or sold to constituents on) overzealous projections, apparently underestimated the ACC (possibly in multiple ways), and brushed off mountains of debt. Maryland was mismanage the past decade and it is mismanaged now. Seriously, they're taking a huge financial hit for what is likely a lateral move, not to mention I can't see how they won't be taking an obvious hit to their hoops program. I have to think that Loh's ego is a huge component of this decision.

Those Big Ten revenue projections are ridiculous.

Sure, the B1G might pay out $43M/yr per team in 7 years... and Va Tech might discover a diamond mine under the drill field, Clemson's sitting on a vein of gold, and Pitt will strike oil on campus... NOT

The Big's projections are way to optimistic. They were made to say what they wanted to hear. They were not made to show the true facts. They were made to hook the target schools. And guess, who bite the two target schools that were facing financial failure.