On a personal note, I don't really have anything against the B10 and I'm sure that there are many benefits that could be derived from membership, but there is tradition and our tradition is our independence. ND people like our abilty to schedule teams from all over and don't really look forward to being confined to a conference schedule. I'm happy to play 3 B10 teams every year. Mich, Purdue and MSU have been good partners over the years, I wouldn't mind scheduling 3 different B10 teams every year, so that over time we play everybody in the B10. Many ND fans want to change the relationship with Purdue and MSU and move them from their tradtional Sept dates to later in the year so that we can add in some other teams who like to play their non-conf schedule in Sept mainly. At one time that seemed impossible as the B10 had an unwritten rule that once you start B10 play you don't play out of conference. That seems to have changed as with the 12th game most if not all B10 teams have a non-conf game in either Oct or Nov, Illinois finishes the season this year with 2 non-conference games after their last B10 game. So there seems to be an oportunity for ND to work into B10 schools schedule later in the year. I hope something like that happens and we can bring in a B12 team in Sept. Terry
I don't know if this has been posted on ND Nation but we do retain control over our games, at least as far as starting times. How often do we see away games that will be televised by ESPN as TBA meaning that if the network wants it to be a night game, it will be a night game. Big Ten games are at 12 or 3:30 in order to fit into network schedulels. All ND home games prior to Nov. this year are at 3:30 and the Nov. games start at 2:30 because of shorter daylight.
Obviously not popular with the Irish faithful, the article does raise the issue of how the football revenue streams at ND are at much greater risk and uncertain/greater variability than any of the other major programs thereby generating a greater premium on performance. No doubt there are benefits to independence, but the risks are evident as well......thus far it seems that the faithful are voting on the side of independence. Interesting the writer's position on, He clearly sees good times ahead for the Irish.....if they don't win and get themselves back to their traditional spot amongst the elite, they won't catch NU or Vandy, thereby making the decision ever more difficult. Tough job.... I'm hoping he's right....a strong Notre Dame is a good thing for college football.
The ND contract has always seemd to me to be convienent for NBC. They want to retain contact with college football yet they really do not want to commit to a full college football schedule. By that I mean that NBC still televises other sporting events such as the Ryder Cup that fill a full weekend of daytime TV. You might have noticed that this is always scheduled during a weekend that ND is not playing a home game. Additionally they cover the Breeder's Cup which I believe is on another non home ND weekend. NBC has certainly been loyal and generous to ND. We owe them a better product and we better deliver this year.
Do you guys feel that we owe NBC exclusivity with regards to televising ND football or do you think when the contract is up we should seek other bids and go with the highest bidder. It seems to me that since the inception of the deal no other network has been given access to the bidding process. I could be wrong about that, but there has never been anything public that indicates we've sought to maximize the revenue by seeing what the market value.
Good question. I may be in the minority, but I'm old school with regard to loyalty. Yes, NBC has made money televising our games over the years. That's what happens in long-term mutually beneficial business relationships. We also have benefitted greatly from the exclusivity during a prolonged down period in the program when another network might not have been so generous. I see opening up the process as a double-edged sword. What if we test the market and can't find a better deal? We've burned a bridge and haven't gotten anything better. On the other hand, if properly negotiated as relates to recent network/conference deals, we should be able to improve our TV revenue and retain a very solid landmark relationship that continues to benefit the university in several ways, financially and otherwise. Personally, I like the exclusivity of the relationship and the control we have over such things as starting times, as Gip described in an earlier post. I would not be enthused about sharing a network with another conference and losing the exclusivity aspect of the deal. I'm sure I also disagree with some strongly opinionated and vocal fans when I say that I enjoy the telecasts and believe that the quality of the announcers is very good.