The average fan doesn't even go to stadiums, they watch on TV; so using your logic the average fan isn't impacted by nor should have concern over whether there is an HD jumbotron in the building or even if attendees have metal bleachers to sit on. It's the same logic.

Your argument comes from a primary starting point of a simple consumer of entertainment, and that is reflected in your repeated inquiries about the the cost/benefit to the average fan, or in other words, you, while ignoring the bigger picture of program health. It certainly is your right to have that perspective. I don't have that perspective for my preferred school, hence the disconnect.

(04-10-2014 01:32 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:19 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 10:02 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  The discuss has turn into a totally different subject. Back to subject, UConn and Cincinnati can not be added unless the price is right for the existing ACC teams.

Is there a correct price for FSU, VT, and Clemson? On the SEC board the one solution broached was NSCU and VT going to the SEC while the ACC picked up Texas as a partial member and added 4 teams from the B12. Maybe you could take 3 members of the B12 and pick up UConn in that scenario.

VT and NCSU have no interest in going to the SEC. They both have a good reason - the same reason - they are not in the position to add 30K seats to their football stadiums in order to compete directly against Bama, Auburn, Tennessee, Florida, and LSU.

That 30K disparity represents about a $20-$24 million annual revenue disparity that can't be made up by the two schools. The State of Va does not have the number of fans that other southern states have and in NC, NC State has to compete against Duke and UNC for football attendance within the same metro. State also directly competes against ECU. ECU, Duke, and UNC seat 120K.

A causal guess would be that the ACC's TV deal would have to increase such that each current football member would see a $2M/year jump (minumum), basically a $28M/year TV deal increase.

I believe ESPN would do that if Texas were invited as member #16, even if they elected not to compete for the conference title (like ND is doing), but agreed to turn over, say, 6 games a season.

ESPN would do it in a NY minute if Penn State joined. That number might even jump to $3M+/year.

Point is, the league isn't going to invite schools and simply break even. If there is a #16, that school's addition has to generate at least $2M/year minimum in football TV revenue.

NZ, I like the passion, but your views on the Carrier Dome, as a facility you have a vested interest in, simply do not match the reality of how most people see it. There is a reason why nearly every stadium built in the 1970's and early 1980's have been torn down, or out of commission, or undergone major renovations. There are no domed stadiums built more than 20 years ago still in use (for sports)in its current state (note the Super Dome had a $300 million renovation). Domes built after the Carrier Dome include The King Dome, The Metrodome, The Hoosier Dome, and the Georgia Dome, all of which have already been replaced or are being replaced in the case of the GA Dome.. And those stadiums were significant upgrades over what the Carrier Dome offers for fans in terms of amentiies. And they have already been replaced.

The comments being made about the age and condition of the Carrier Dome, are not out of line. They are well reasoned and legitimate.

(04-10-2014 02:58 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  A causal guess would be that the ACC's TV deal would have to increase such that each current football member would see a $2M/year jump (minumum), basically a $28M/year TV deal increase.

I believe ESPN would do that if Texas were invited as member #16, even if they elected not to compete for the conference title (like ND is doing), but agreed to turn over, say, 6 games a season.

ESPN would do it in a NY minute if Penn State joined. That number might even jump to $3M+/year.

Point is, the league isn't going to invite schools and simply break even. If there is a #16, that school's addition has to generate at least $2M/year minimum in football TV revenue.

I want more than just a paycheck. It must be a geographic fit (which Texas isn't). There must be some natural rivals (preferably more than one... which neither Texas or Penn State has). There must be NEW media markets delivered (which Penn State doesn't do). There must be at least so-so academics.

Instead of thinking West Virginia or Pedo State or Texas ... we need to be thinking Tennessee or Ohio State. SEC East and eastern B1G should be the target zone.

(04-10-2014 03:16 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  NZ, I like the passion, but your views on the Carrier Dome, as a facility you have a vested interest in, simply do not match the reality of how most people see it. There is a reason why nearly every stadium built in the 1970's and early 1980's have been torn down, or out of commission, or undergone major renovations. There are no domed stadiums built more than 20 years ago still in use (for sports)in its current state (note the Super Dome had a $300 million renovation). Domes built after the Carrier Dome include The King Dome, The Metrodome, The Hoosier Dome, and the Georgia Dome, all of which have already been replaced or are being replaced in the case of the GA Dome.. And those stadiums were significant upgrades over what the Carrier Dome offers for fans in terms of amentiies. And they have already been replaced.

The comments being made about the age and condition of the Carrier Dome, are not out of line. They are well reasoned and legitimate.

What's wrong with it? All I've heard are generic statements and misinformed statements.

It was called a "dump." Why?

It's a concrete stadium built in 1980. The thing could easily last another 70-80 years without structural problems. Harvard's stadium is still kicking and that thing A. isn't enclosed and B. takes salt water all day long.

It isn't dirty on the outside or the inside, there aren't leaks, and the seats/interior isn't torn up.

Sure, it doesn't have as many luxury boxes as it would have had if it was built today, but I hardly think that makes it a "dump." The average fan is not affected in any way, shape, or form.

Sure, it doesn't have AC, but it is also located in Syracuse New York. Syracuse gets more snow than Buffalo. If the Dome is a dump because of a lack of AC, then virtually every SEC stadium, Big XII stadium, southern ACC stadium, and non-coastal southern PAC stadium is as well.

Yes, the Dome has bench seats (I said that in my first post), but so does Beaver Stadium, Darrell K Royal Memorial Stadium, and a whole host of other stadiums. The difference is that the Dome is exclusively bunch seating, whereas the other stadiums use bench-style seating in a limited capacity. Given that NOBODY is calling Texas' stadium a dump, is whole v. partial the difference?

All the talk about luxury boxes affecting the program as a whole and thus affecting game day experience is rediculous. Free trade hurt this country's manufacturing base, which was the corner stone of upstate NY's economy. Given that there is a correlation between local economic growth and football talent produced, the same logic behind luxury boxes hurting game day fan experiences could be used to say "the world trade organization" hurts fan experience at Syracuse. I don't know about everyone else, but I'm not ready to blame any negative Dome experiences that I might have on Lax Chinese environmental laws and free market economics.

Edit: the Other domes of that eara were torn down either because of cost reasons or because they got gross from poor upkeep. Cost has nothing to do with the Dome either being a dump or not being a dump, and the university does a great job of keeping the structure well-kept, making the second reason as irrelevant as the first.

(04-10-2014 04:08 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 02:58 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  A causal guess would be that the ACC's TV deal would have to increase such that each current football member would see a $2M/year jump (minumum), basically a $28M/year TV deal increase.

I believe ESPN would do that if Texas were invited as member #16, even if they elected not to compete for the conference title (like ND is doing), but agreed to turn over, say, 6 games a season.

ESPN would do it in a NY minute if Penn State joined. That number might even jump to $3M+/year.

Point is, the league isn't going to invite schools and simply break even. If there is a #16, that school's addition has to generate at least $2M/year minimum in football TV revenue.

I want more than just a paycheck. It must be a geographic fit (which Texas isn't). There must be some natural rivals (preferably more than one... which neither Texas or Penn State has). There must be NEW media markets delivered (which Penn State doesn't do). There must be at least so-so academics.

Instead of thinking West Virginia or Pedo State or Texas ... we need to be thinking Tennessee or Ohio State. SEC East and eastern B1G should be the target zone.

Rivals:
PSU- SU, Pitt, ND, VT

(04-10-2014 02:49 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  The average fan doesn't even go to stadiums, they watch on TV; so using your logic the average fan isn't impacted by nor should have concern over whether there is an HD jumbotron in the building or even if attendees have metal bleachers to sit on. It's the same logic.

Your argument comes from a primary starting point of a simple consumer of entertainment, and that is reflected in your repeated inquiries about the the cost/benefit to the average fan, or in other words, you, while ignoring the bigger picture of program health. It certainly is your right to have that perspective. I don't have that perspective for my preferred school, hence the disconnect.

What? You called the Dome a "dump" when I questioned you on it, you argued that the average fan, who is watching the game on TV, has a negative interaction with the Carrier Dome because the Dome lacks sufficient luxury boxes, which is causing the school to underfund the teams that play in it.

That makes sense to you?

cuse had athletic revenue that ranked in the low 30s among FBS while a member of the big east.........

think about that for a second.....

while the dome may not be as prestigious as it once was & the university would be stupid not to get a new stadium if given the chance, anyone who thinks the dome is having a negative impact on the university is a dumb***

(04-10-2014 04:26 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 02:49 PM)CrazyPaco Wrote:  The average fan doesn't even go to stadiums, they watch on TV; so using your logic the average fan isn't impacted by nor should have concern over whether there is an HD jumbotron in the building or even if attendees have metal bleachers to sit on. It's the same logic.

Your argument comes from a primary starting point of a simple consumer of entertainment, and that is reflected in your repeated inquiries about the the cost/benefit to the average fan, or in other words, you, while ignoring the bigger picture of program health. It certainly is your right to have that perspective. I don't have that perspective for my preferred school, hence the disconnect.

What? You called the Dome a "dump" when I questioned you on it, you argued that the average fan, who is watching the game on TV, has a negative interaction with the Carrier Dome because the Dome lacks sufficient luxury boxes, which is causing the school to underfund the teams that play in it.

That makes sense to you?

BTW, I never called it a "dump". I said it was bad, in the context of being at the bottom of ACC facilities. I've listed many reasons why. You don't agree. Fine. You've not been effective at changing my opinion of it in comparison to other universities' facilities.

I don't need to fight a 1990s battle of Pitt Stadium for Syracuse. I'll let Gross do that for you.

(04-10-2014 04:08 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 02:58 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote:  A causal guess would be that the ACC's TV deal would have to increase such that each current football member would see a $2M/year jump (minumum), basically a $28M/year TV deal increase.

I believe ESPN would do that if Texas were invited as member #16, even if they elected not to compete for the conference title (like ND is doing), but agreed to turn over, say, 6 games a season.

ESPN would do it in a NY minute if Penn State joined. That number might even jump to $3M+/year.

Point is, the league isn't going to invite schools and simply break even. If there is a #16, that school's addition has to generate at least $2M/year minimum in football TV revenue.

I want more than just a paycheck. It must be a geographic fit (which Texas isn't). There must be some natural rivals (preferably more than one... which neither Texas or Penn State has). There must be NEW media markets delivered (which Penn State doesn't do). There must be at least so-so academics.

Instead of thinking West Virginia or Pedo State or Texas ... we need to be thinking Tennessee or Ohio State. SEC East and eastern B1G should be the target zone.

I heard a rumor a long time ago that Florida and Georgia expressed some interest in the ACC. Emphasis on RUMOR and A LONG TIME AGO. We all know how GTS feels about Georgia but both schools meet all of his criteria.

The Carrier Dome is not a dump. It has had upgrades. New roof, ribbon boards, new speakers, new video boards, paint, Club 44, etc...it's limitation is it can't generate extra revenue for naming rights, no AC, bench seating, and close in parking is limited. Unlike the other air roof supported Domes built in the 70's to early 90's, the Carrier Dome is used a lot to overcome the expenses of 24/7 running huge fans for few events.

(04-10-2014 07:05 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  The Carrier Dome is not a dump. It has had upgrades. New roof, ribbon boards, new speakers, new video boards, paint, Club 44, etc...it's limitation is it can't generate extra revenue for naming rights, no AC, bench seating, and close in parking is limited. Unlike the other air roof supported Domes built in the 70's to early 90's, the Carrier Dome is used a lot to overcome the expenses of 24/7 running huge fans for few events.

this^^^^^^


and fyi club 44 is one of the best stadium clubs I have seen in a while

(04-10-2014 07:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 07:05 PM)TexanMark Wrote:  The Carrier Dome is not a dump. It has had upgrades. New roof, ribbon boards, new speakers, new video boards, paint, Club 44, etc...it's limitation is it can't generate extra revenue for naming rights, no AC, bench seating, and close in parking is limited. Unlike the other air roof supported Domes built in the 70's to early 90's, the Carrier Dome is used a lot to overcome the expenses of 24/7 running huge fans for few events.

this^^^^^^


and fyi club 44 is one of the best stadium clubs I have seen in a while

SU having bad facilities is just one of those "facts" that, despite having no credible basis, tends to get repeated ad nauseum. It's like the almost traditional "SU basketball doesn't leave the state of NY" comment that proceeds virtually every SU basketball game. It may have been true at one point in time, but it isn't true any more. The same goes for the "fact" the SU football is a cellar dweller because SU is a "basketball school." UCONN, UC, and RU fans love to state that "fact."

(04-10-2014 04:08 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I want more than just a paycheck. It must be a geographic fit (which Texas isn't). There must be some natural rivals (preferably more than one... which neither Texas or Penn State has). There must be NEW media markets delivered (which Penn State doesn't do). There must be at least so-so academics.

Are you insinuating that the entire state of Pennsylvania is now an ACC TV market? Because that makes no sense. Swofford can claim that all he wants, but neither Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, Boston College, nor Syracuse "deliver" their entire states.

(04-11-2014 09:42 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 04:08 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  I want more than just a paycheck. It must be a geographic fit (which Texas isn't). There must be some natural rivals (preferably more than one... which neither Texas or Penn State has). There must be NEW media markets delivered (which Penn State doesn't do). There must be at least so-so academics.

Are you insinuating that the entire state of Pennsylvania is now an ACC TV market? Because that makes no sense. Swofford can claim that all he wants, but neither Pittsburgh, Louisville, Georgia Tech, Boston College, nor Syracuse "deliver" their entire states.

Corbett - you are forgetting that there is more than one football game a week. Between CBS, NBS, ABC, ESPN, and Fox plus smaller entities, there are about 12 college football games a week for the college football fan to be seen on Thursday night, sometimes Friday night and Saturday afternoon and night.

In the State of Kentucky, UK will deliver the State for the three hours they are on television, but there are 30 or more additional hours to cover. That will then be covered by Louisville, Ohio State, West Va, TN, Purdue, etc., etc.

Think of it this way - Ohio State does not deliver Ohio 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

You should Google the ABC/ESPN broadcast maps and you will see that those teams do in fact deliver their entire states, unless they have direct competition from their larger in-State school. BC and Syracuse have no such competition.

Swagger - Penn State would give the ACC a new market and return and old market - New Jersey and Baltimore for football.

Corbett, with the moves of ND, Pitt, Syracuse, MD, Rutgers and Louisville, the ACC and B10 markets overlap in DC, Pa, Kentucky, NYC, Cincinnati, Indiana, Chicagoland, SW Michigan, West Va, Southside NY, and Eastern Ohio. In each market a particular conference will be more dominate, based on the teams playing and the sports being played.

Keep in mind there are 24-30 hours of football to fill each week and twice as much basketball.

The ACC's media market footprint is the largest in the nation. It includes all of New England, New York, Metro NYC, PA, DC, Virginia, Delaware, Eastern West Va, Eastern Ohio, Kentucky, Cincy, Indiana, Greater Chicago Land, SW Michigan, NC, Tri-Cities Tennessee, SC, Georgia, Chattanooga TN, Florida, SE Alabama.

The ACC has the number one draw in greater Chicagoland and Metro NYC - Notre Dame. We also have the number one draw in New England and Boston, North Carolina, and Virginia. We have the 2 and 3 draw in Florida. The 2 draw in Kentucky. The 2 draw in PA, etc., etc.

Also keep in mind the actual viewing habits of college sports fans - most watch more than one game a week, they watch their conference mates, they watch who they hate, and they watch the big national game out of their region.

A Bama football watcher, watches Bama first. Then he watches Auburn or TN hoping they lose. Then he will watch FSU/Clemson or Texas/OU - he's watching all our parts of three games a week. If he is bored on a Thursday night he will turn on MSU or Arkansas as they play dog **** state u.

I am not forgetting any of that. But those teams that I listed, do not pull the fandom within their states that far away from their general location. That was my point. Simply being in a state, does not deliver a market. That was the big mistake the Big East made when they backfilled when Pitt and Syracuse left (to be fair, they didn't have much choice, but the assumptions made grossly overvalued their expected TV value). To say Penn State is market duplication for the ACC is asinine. I'm not really sure how else to put I.

(04-11-2014 10:55 AM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  Corbett, with the moves of ND, Pitt, Syracuse, MD, Rutgers and Louisville, the ACC and B10 markets overlap in DC, Pa, Kentucky, NYC, Cincinnati, Indiana, Chicagoland, SW Michigan, West Va, Southside NY, and Eastern Ohio. In each market a particular conference will be more dominate, based on the teams playing and the sports being played.

Keep in mind there are 24-30 hours of football to fill each week and twice as much basketball.

The ACC's media market footprint is the largest in the nation. It includes all of New England, New York, Metro NYC, PA, DC, Virginia, Delaware, Eastern West Va, Eastern Ohio, Kentucky, Cincy, Indiana, Greater Chicago Land, SW Michigan, NC, Tri-Cities Tennessee, SC, Georgia, Chattanooga TN, Florida, SE Alabama.

The ACC has the number one draw in greater Chicagoland and Metro NYC - Notre Dame. We also have the number one draw in New England and Boston, North Carolina, and Virginia. We have the 2 and 3 draw in Florida. The 2 draw in Kentucky. The 2 draw in PA, etc., etc.

Also keep in mind the actual viewing habits of college sports fans - most watch more than one game a week, they watch their conference mates, they watch who they hate, and they watch the big national game out of their region.

That's quite the media footprint.

To my longtime pal, Swagger -- we'll have to disagree concerning Texas. I believe they are a geographic fit now that the ACC has ND as member.

Contiguous geography ceased to exist when ND joined. Having Texas aboard, even at 6 games a season, expands the footprint into most of Texas, Oklahoma and parts of Kansas.

FWIW-- Adding Kansas basketball adds the rest of Kansas (although 'they' can leave Wichita where it is).

FWIW #2 -- Adding Penn State would make Fox VERY nervous.

EVERY team draws nationally - the differences are in the percentages.

E.g. Cincinnati draws the entire state of Ohio; so does Ohio State. Big difference is ratings, attendance, etc. (various ways of measuring the extent of fan interest).

UConn draws in NYC, but to what extent? There are many teams which draw in New York City - to varying degrees, and none probably more than 50% of the TVs. As for ticket-buyers, the NYC favorite team is probably Notre Dame, but I'd guess at least half of New Yorkers wouldn't go to an Irish football game if they had free tickets and the game was at Met-Life or Yankee Stadium. That's just the way it is. College football isn't religion EVERYWHERE.

Myself I watch most Florida schools when They are on If I have the Time. I watch Cincinnati, OSU, Indiana, WVU, Kentucky, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Clemson, and the rest of the ACC. I will watch SEC, AAC, B1G Name matchups if I have time and not while My favorite ones are on at the same time. Many schools have a following all over the country and not just one state.