ND and the Big Ten
J.C. Watts Enslin
"Maybe it's time Notre Dame thinks about a monumental change. One that
goes deeper than the football coach. One that lets the Irish keep
their national-championship options open but gives them other options
as well.
Maybe it's time Notre Dame revisited joining the Big Ten."
I am beginning to wonder if ND's problem is more "structural" than it
is simply a coaching problem.
One thing that this article doesn't mention is that if ND stays in
their current relationship with the BE, ND's bowl scenarios are pretty
pathetic if they don't make the BCS in any given year. If they joined
the Big Ten, they would pretty much have to finish in the top half of
the conference...or maybe a little better...and they'll at worst be
playing in Florida on New Year's Day.
Jon
Jaybyrd
the dohmers are going to need a LOT of money to make the weis
change.. A LOT of money. I'm thinking that staying with their own
marquie TV contract will give them more money (someone correct me on
this please if I'm off). That means they need to stay independent to
keep more money and make the coaching change.
McMahone
> the dohmers are going to need a LOT of money to make the weis
> change.. A LOT of money. I'm thinking that staying with their own
> marquie TV contract will give them more money (someone correct me on
> this please if I'm off). That means they need to stay independent to
> keep more money and make the coaching change.
Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
TOE
> Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
> shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
Ironically I wouldn't be surprised if more people watched ND on NBC to
see them fall on their faces. As far as BCS money goes, I'm sure the
business big-branes have calculated how often ND needs to get one of
those checks in order to make it worth while not to be in a
conference. My guess is they've passed that number.
It makes me sade. I am one of the few Michigan fans who loves ND.
-Tom Enright
J.C. Watts Enslin
The revenue difference is nowhere near as people think. Look at this
article.
"Notre Dame's television and shared Big East conference revenue in
2009 will be, at best, $11.35 million.
Why's that number important? Because in 2008, every school in the Big
Ten will clear north of $15 million from the conference, a number that
will only increase in years to come."
and
"Let me repeat that, the Big Ten Network alone has almost equaled the
payout for Notre Dame's sacrosanct contract with NBC."
ND's deal with NBC was groundbreaking when it occurred, but believe
me, it is nowhere near as lucrative as people want you to believe
now. And for all the flak that the Big Ten took when it created the
BTN, it is just printing money for the conference right now.
Jon
stephenJ
Actually, with the Big East and their other arrangements, ND can play in
(a) a bottom-feeder bowl, if they barely qualify (e.g., 7-5, 6-6) or if
they are good but not BCS-level, the can play in the Gator/Champs or
Cotton, which are good bowls.
And, the BCS gives them $1.75m whether they play in a bowl or not.
So the bowl situation isn't a problem, and i don't see how joining the
B10 will help in any other way either.
ND's real problem is academic standards. E.g., they lost Carson Palmer
to USC because of grades, and they lost Urban Meyer to Florida because
they won't allow "provisional" qualifiers.
--
"if federal judges have the final word over its meaning,
the Constitution would be a mere thing of wax in the hands
of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form
they please".
- Thomas Jefferson
stephenJ
> ND's deal with NBC was groundbreaking when it occurred, but believe
> me, it is nowhere near as lucrative as people want you to believe
> now. And for all the flak that the Big Ten took when it created the
> BTN, it is just printing money for the conference right now.
Yes, as recently as 5 years ago, ND had a BIG television money
advantage. But, since the advent of the B10 Network and the SEC's huge
deals with CBS/ESPN, that gap has all but been erased, and it's probably
the case the SEC teams now get MORE tv revenue than ND, and the B10
teams as much.
--
The Constitution does not prohibit legislatures from
enacting stupid laws.
- Thurgood Marshall
J.C. Watts Enslin
> J.C. Watts Enslin wrote:
> >http://www.suntimes.com/sports/colleges/1899115,CST-SPT-herb23.article
>
> > "Maybe it's time Notre Dame thinks about a monumental change. One that
> > goes deeper than the football coach. One that lets the Irish keep
> > their national-championship options open but gives them other options
> > as well.
>
> > Maybe it's time Notre Dame revisited joining the Big Ten."
>
> > I am beginning to wonder if ND's problem is more "structural" than it
> > is simply a coaching problem.
>
> > One thing that this article doesn't mention is that if ND stays in
> > their current relationship with the BE, ND's bowl scenarios are pretty
> > pathetic if they don't make the BCS in any given year. If they joined
> > the Big Ten, they would pretty much have to finish in the top half of
> > the conference...or maybe a little better...and they'll at worst be
> > playing in Florida on New Year's Day.
>
> Actually, with the Big East and their other arrangements, ND can play in
> (a) a bottom-feeder bowl, if they barely qualify (e.g., 7-5, 6-6) or if
> they are good but not BCS-level, the can play in the Gator/Champs or
> Cotton, which are good bowls.
The Gator is moving to Big Ten v. SEC next year. Why do you think
they can get into the Cotton? That's a SEC v. Big 12 bowl.
And the Champs is not a good bowl by any stretch.
Jon
StephenJ
I said Gator/Champs because of that transition - this year it's the
gator, next year its the champs. To get the Big East #2 team, Champs
has upped their payout (to $2.4m) and is now ballpark with the gator,
though not quite at that level. It is now a pretty good bowl.
The cotton's arrangement with the SEC is that it can take Notre Dame 1
time every 4 years instead of an SEC team. Had ND missed the BCS but
finished with a good record (say 9-3) they would have almost certainly
have been picked by the Cotton this year.
Jaybyrd
> On Nov 24, 8:29 am, McMahone <mmcmah...@umhb.edu> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 24, 8:17 am, Jaybyrd <jaybyrdb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > the dohmers are going to need a LOT of money to make the weis
> > > change.. A LOT of money. I'm thinking that staying with their own
> > > marquie TV contract will give them more money (someone correct me on
> > > this please if I'm off). That means they need to stay independent to
> > > keep more money and make the coaching change.
>
> > Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> > assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
> > shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> > they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> > TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
>
> The revenue difference is nowhere near as people think. Look at this
> article.
>
>
> "Notre Dame's television and shared Big East conference revenue in
> 2009 will be, at best, $11.35 million.
>
> Why's that number important? Because in 2008, every school in the Big
> Ten will clear north of $15 million from the conference, a number that
> will only increase in years to come."
>
> and
>
> "Let me repeat that, the Big Ten Network alone has almost equaled the
> payout for Notre Dame's sacrosanct contract with NBC."
>
> ND's deal with NBC was groundbreaking when it occurred, but believe
> me, it is nowhere near as lucrative as people want you to believe
> now. And for all the flak that the Big Ten took when it created the
> BTN, it is just printing money for the conference right now.
>
> Jon
thanks for the link. Maybe this will push them over. In any case
ND is hurting and their marqui valyoo isn't enough to make up for
it. Maybe they will have to keep Weis as who is available to be
their savior?
J.C. Watts Enslin
The Champs is a secondary bowl played when no one is watching. Yeah
the payout might have improved, but the exposure is crap.
> The cotton's arrangement with the SEC is that it can take Notre Dame 1
> time every 4 years instead of an SEC team. Had ND missed the BCS but
> finished with a good record (say 9-3) they would have almost certainly
> have been picked by the Cotton this year.
I was unaware of that. Thanks.
Jon
Cyclone Ranger
> Ironically I wouldn't be surprised if more people watched ND on NBC to
> see them fall on their faces.
Bingeaux.
Anthony Summers
> ND's real problem is academic standards. E.g., they lost Carson Palmer
> to USC because of grades, and they lost Urban Meyer to Florida because
> they won't allow "provisional" qualifiers.
Stanford has a higher academic pedigree than Notre Dame, and they're
doing quite well this year.
--
<insert witty or profound comment here>
The Ghost of Edward M. Kennedy
>> ND's real problem is academic standards. E.g., they lost Carson Palmer
>> to USC because of grades, and they lost Urban Meyer to Florida because
>> they won't allow "provisional" qualifiers.
>
> Stanford has a higher academic pedigree than Notre Dame, and they're
> doing quite well this year.
True, but it *is* a handicap. There are recruits that schools like Duke
have to exclude. Stanford does an admirable job at balancing this act,
but they aren't exactly a Florida-type juggernaut.
--Tedward
Jim Gysin
J.C. Watts Enslin sent the following on 11/24/2009 8:50 AM:
> On Nov 24, 8:29 am, McMahone <mmcmah...@umhb.edu> wrote:
>> On Nov 24, 8:17 am, Jaybyrd <jaybyrdb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> the dohmers are going to need a LOT of money to make the weis
>>> change.. A LOT of money. I'm thinking that staying with their own
>>> marquie TV contract will give them more money (someone correct me on
>>> this please if I'm off). That means they need to stay independent to
>>> keep more money and make the coaching change.
>> Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
>> assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
>> shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
>> they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
>> TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
>
>
> The revenue difference is nowhere near as people think. Look at this
> article.
>
> http://ncaafootball.fanhouse.com/2009/06/15/as-notre-dames-tv-money-dwindles-so-too-should-its-independenc/
>
> "Notre Dame's television and shared Big East conference revenue in
> 2009 will be, at best, $11.35 million.
The operative words are "shared Big East conference revenue," which
leaves out much of what football makes independently.
> Why's that number important? Because in 2008, every school in the Big
> Ten will clear north of $15 million from the conference, a number that
> will only increase in years to come."
>
> and
>
> "Let me repeat that, the Big Ten Network alone has almost equaled the
> payout for Notre Dame's sacrosanct contract with NBC."
>
> ND's deal with NBC was groundbreaking when it occurred, but believe
> me, it is nowhere near as lucrative as people want you to believe
> now. And for all the flak that the Big Ten took when it created the
> BTN, it is just printing money for the conference right now.
I really don't think that BTN will be able to sustain itself on the
basis of non-revenue sports, for obvious reasons. And since the only
other new thing that they're getting is revenue sport matchups that ESPN
and the networks don't want, those games will (for the most part) only
draw audience numbers from the fanbase of the two schools competing in
that game, as well. And since it's not a game that ESPN or a network
was interested in, then odds are good that the Nielsens are gonna be
pathetic. There simply aren't enough rabid fans to generate the needed
audience size for fencing tournaments and matchups of bottom dwellers on
the football or hoops side of things, so advertisers are gonna start
lowballing what they'll pay for spots on BTN. And thus the trickle-down
will begin, if it hasn't already.
Also, since the network is majority-owned by the conference, does that
mean that the schools in the conference are subsidizing things? And if
so, to what extent? Whatever it is, you have to account for what they
ante up, not just what they take out of the pot.
Lastly, the writer totally blew by the admission that "Notre Dame
doesn't release their finances publicly." People like to *think* that
they know how much Charlie Weis makes and how much his buyout would be,
but the bottom line is that they have no real clue. The same goes for
much of the school's athletic revenue.
--
Jim Gysin
Waukesha, WI
Jim Gysin
stephenJ sent the following on 11/24/2009 9:01 AM:
> ND's real problem is academic standards. E.g., they lost Carson Palmer
> to USC because of grades, and they lost Urban Meyer to Florida because
> they won't allow "provisional" qualifiers.
As I've mentioned repeatedly, this just isn't true. If nothing else,
Charlie has shown that ND and talent can go hand-in-hand. Sadly, he
just hasn't shown that he can do much with that talent once he gets it
on campus.
Anarchist Ruffain of Notre Dame
> On Nov 24, 9:29 am, McMahone <mmcmah...@umhb.edu> wrote:
>
> > Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> > assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
> > shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> > they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> > TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
I'm pretty sure we get some BB cash from the Big East. Just a guess...
> Ironically I wouldn't be surprised if more people watched ND on NBC to
> see them fall on their faces. As far as BCS money goes, I'm sure the
> business big-branes have calculated how often ND needs to get one of
> those checks in order to make it worth while not to be in a
> conference. My guess is they've passed that number.
Our last AD bent and submitted on the most recent BCS contract, to the
effect that a Gator Bowel appearance might actually be a better result
financially than, say, the Orange Bowel. I used to think the admin was
just incompetent as regards the football program of late, I'm slowly
coming to the view that they're actively trying to bring it down.
--
TO
J.C. Watts Enslin
> J.C. Watts Enslin sent the following on 11/24/2009 8:50 AM:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 24, 8:29 am, McMahone <mmcmah...@umhb.edu> wrote:
> >> On Nov 24, 8:17 am, Jaybyrd <jaybyrdb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>> the dohmers are going to need a LOT of money to make the weis
> >>> change.. A LOT of money. I'm thinking that staying with their own
> >>> marquie TV contract will give them more money (someone correct me on
> >>> this please if I'm off). That means they need to stay independent to
> >>> keep more money and make the coaching change.
> >> Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> >> assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
> >> shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> >> they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> >> TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
>
> > The revenue difference is nowhere near as people think. Look at this
> > article.
>
>
> > "Notre Dame's television and shared Big East conference revenue in
> > 2009 will be, at best, $11.35 million.
>
> The operative words are "shared Big East conference revenue," which
> leaves out much of what football makes independently.
Read the whole paragraph. It is counting both the estimated football
television contract of $9 million, and the shared amount for the
sports in which it participates as a Big East member. It does not
include bowl revenue, but none of the conference figures include bowl
revenue either.
The figures reported above are all net revenue figures. The reason
that there are so many cable television channels is because the profit
margins on cable television, especially when you are showing your own
shows, are ridiculously high. The University of Wisconsin cleared $6
million in in net revenue in 2007 when the BTN had a much more limited
audience.
And they generate enough programming for an audience and for them to
be profitable. The last two years have shown that it isn't going
away.
Jon
Anthony Summers
Granted, but I don't buy that a school who recruits globally can find
themselves crippled by such a situation. There's not a kid in America
who wouldn't race to the phone to speak to the head coach of Notre Dame
when he calls. Surely there are 200+ 4-star plus athletes who are also
good enough in school to pull their weight at ND, Stanford, Duke, etc.
J.C. Watts Enslin
<mrtobr...@ameritech.net> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 9:46 am, TOE <alicam...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 24, 9:29 am, McMahone <mmcmah...@umhb.edu> wrote:
>
> > > Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> > > assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
> > > shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> > > they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> > > TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
>
> I'm pretty sure we get some BB cash from the Big East. Just a guess...
They get an estimated $2 million from all non-football sports.
Peanuts.
Jon
The Ghost of Edward M. Kennedy
>> >> ND's real problem is academic standards. E.g., they lost Carson Palmer
>> >> to USC because of grades, and they lost Urban Meyer to Florida because
>> >> they won't allow "provisional" qualifiers.
>> >
>> > Stanford has a higher academic pedigree than Notre Dame, and they're
>> > doing quite well this year.
>>
>> True, but it *is* a handicap. There are recruits that schools like Duke
>> have to exclude. Stanford does an admirable job at balancing this act,
>> but they aren't exactly a Florida-type juggernaut.
>
> Granted, but I don't buy that a school who recruits globally can find
> themselves crippled by such a situation.
Crippled? No. But in football, Stanford and Duke might as well
concede that being a ND, FL, FSU, Michigan, etc. is out of reach.
ND and maybe Penn State are special exceptions.
> There's not a kid in America
> who wouldn't race to the phone to speak to the head coach of Notre Dame
> when he calls. Surely there are 200+ 4-star plus athletes who are also
> good enough in school to pull their weight at ND, Stanford, Duke, etc.
Yes, but the recruits that are good enough to go to those schools
are recruited by everyone. Basketball is do-able.
--Tedward
The Ghost of Edward M. Kennedy
> > > Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> > > assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
> > > shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> > > they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> > > TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
>
> I'm pretty sure we get some BB cash from the Big East. Just a guess...
<
<They get an estimated $2 million from all non-football sports.
<Peanuts.
If I had a salary of $9 million, I would not consider a $2 million
bonus to be "peanuts".
Well, maybe if Bellomy was in charge...
--Tedward
Ar Q
"J.C. Watts Enslin" <jen...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:1b05d07e-66eb-4098...@e20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
and
Jon
~~~
Based on Big Ten's poor performance this year and in recent history, I
expect Big 10 to lose one or two New Year Day bowls to Big 12 on the
next round of TV/bowl negotiation. Face it, Big 10 countries has lost
almost half of its population since the recession started. Actually I
don't think Big 10 deserves to keep its automatic Rose Bowl bid. I would
love to see PAC10/Big 12 champions matchup on Rose Bowl.
Ar Q
stephenJ
No doubt, it's not as good as the Gator. It's not NYD, and it pays a bit
less, and it doesn't have the same history/marquee value. But it will be
pretty good going forward.
stephenJ
Thanks for saving me the trouble. :)
--
I do not think the United States would come to an end if
we lost our power to declare an Act of Congress void. I do
think the Union would be imperiled if we could not make
that declaration as to the laws of the several States.
- Oliver Wendell Holmes, on the SCOTUS
J.C. Watts Enslin
wrote:
> "J.C. Watts Enslin" <jens...@charter.net> wrote
>
> > > > Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> > > > assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get two
> > > > shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> > > > they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> > > > TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
>
> > I'm pretty sure we get some BB cash from the Big East. Just a guess...
>
> <
> <They get an estimated $2 million from all non-football sports.
> <Peanuts.
>
> If I had a salary of $9 million, I would not consider a $2 million
> bonus to be "peanuts".
When compared what they could get in the Big Ten? Peanuts.
Jon
stephenJ
No doubt, a bad coach (like weis) can squander the efforts of a good
recruiter (like weis!).
But, it's also clear that ND does have higher standards than some of the
other powerhouses, and that this can be costly, no matter who the coach
is. When you lose talent like Carson Palmer and Urban Meyer because of
it, well, you've paid a cost.
stephenJ
> Based on Big Ten's poor performance this year and in recent history, I
> expect Big 10 to lose one or two New Year Day bowls to Big 12 on the
> next round of TV/bowl negotiation. Face it, Big 10 countries has lost
> almost half of its population since the recession started.
Don't confuse performance on the field (which in this context is
irrelevant) with performance in terms of TV ratings and fans in the
stands (which is all that matters to bowls).
The B10 is lousy in the former, but still aces in the latter. Which is
why in this latest round of bowl signings, coming off SIX STRAIGHT BCS
bowl losses, the B10 actually improved its lineup, losing the Alamo and
Champs but gaining the better Gator, plus adding the Texas and Dallas
bowls. It now has one more bowl than the last time around.
The B10 isn't going anywhere or losing anything, despite its flops in
big games.
--
Unhappy women are given to protect their sensitiveness
by cynical gossip, by whining, by high-church and new-thought
religions, or by a fog of vagueness.
- Sinclair Lewis
The Ghost of Edward M. Kennedy
> > > > Any idea what kind of money they get from the TV contract? I would
> > > > assume it's a lot, but this year, the B10 teams will probably get
> > > > two
> > > > shares of BCS money. And, there's the money from the mens BB tourney
> > > > they could share. I would guess that's not nearly enough--unless the
> > > > TV contract is more about exposure than dollars.
>
> > I'm pretty sure we get some BB cash from the Big East. Just a guess...
>
> <
> <They get an estimated $2 million from all non-football sports.
> <Peanuts.
>
> If I had a salary of $9 million, I would not consider a $2 million
> bonus to be "peanuts".
<
<When compared what they could get in the Big Ten? Peanuts.
Eh, they aren't going to get their own $9 million indivdual contract
*and* a share of B10 football money.
--Tedward
Anthony Summers
> > Granted, but I don't buy that a school who recruits globally can find
> > themselves crippled by such a situation.
>
> Crippled? No. But in football, Stanford and Duke might as well
> concede that being a ND, FL, FSU, Michigan, etc. is out of reach.
> ND and maybe Penn State are special exceptions.
>
> > There's not a kid in America
> > who wouldn't race to the phone to speak to the head coach of Notre Dame
> > when he calls. Surely there are 200+ 4-star plus athletes who are also
> > good enough in school to pull their weight at ND, Stanford, Duke, etc.
>
> Yes, but the recruits that are good enough to go to those schools
> are recruited by everyone. Basketball is do-able.
I realize that you're focused on Duke, but I was talking about ND.
McMahone
> ND's deal with NBC was groundbreaking when it occurred, but believe
> me, it is nowhere near as lucrative as people want you to believe
> now. And for all the flak that the Big Ten took when it created the
> BTN, it is just printing money for the conference right now.
>
> Jon
That's exactly the kind of thing I was wondering. Just based on those
basic numbers, it doesn't look like the money really should be the
factor for ND staying independent.
Starcade
Notre Dame is becoming so irrelevant, you have to wonder whether some
of these non-AQ conferences would suit them better.
But if they don't make the change good and quick, I don't see Notre
Dame being a relevant force in college football, and that's going to
mean they're going to be non-AQ the next time people look at the BCS
or any similar system.
Mike
Starcade
> ND's real problem is academic standards. E.g., they lost Carson Palmer
> to USC because of grades, and they lost Urban Meyer to Florida because
> they won't allow "provisional" qualifiers.
The problem with that is then they have to make a decision.
Are they students or are they athletes?
The concept that they are both, for the vast majority of these minor-
league athletes at the vast majority of these farm-system schools, is
LAUGHABLE.
Mike
Jim Gysin
stephenJ sent the following on 11/24/2009 1:32 PM:
> Jim Gysin wrote:
>> stephenJ sent the following on 11/24/2009 9:01 AM:
>>> ND's real problem is academic standards. E.g., they lost Carson Palmer
>>> to USC because of grades, and they lost Urban Meyer to Florida because
>>> they won't allow "provisional" qualifiers.
>> As I've mentioned repeatedly, this just isn't true. If nothing else,
>> Charlie has shown that ND and talent can go hand-in-hand. Sadly, he
>> just hasn't shown that he can do much with that talent once he gets it
>> on campus.
>
> No doubt, a bad coach (like weis) can squander the efforts of a good
> recruiter (like weis!).
>
> But, it's also clear that ND does have higher standards than some of the
> other powerhouses, and that this can be costly, no matter who the coach
> is. When you lose talent like Carson Palmer and Urban Meyer because of
> it, well, you've paid a cost.
It's all relative. All I'm saying is that it's not as hard to get good
kids into ND as the Ty and Davie apologists were trying to make it out
to be. And Charlie has proven it.
Michael Press
<7508e107-0f7c-4c97...@v37g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Jaybyrd <jayby...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 9:05 am, "J.C. Watts Enslin" <jens...@charter.net> wrote:
> > http://www.suntimes.com/sports/colleges/1899115,CST-SPT-herb23.article
> >
> > "Maybe it's time Notre Dame thinks about a monumental change. One that
> > goes deeper than the football coach. One that lets the Irish keep
> > their national-championship options open but gives them other options
> > as well.
> >
> > Maybe it's time Notre Dame revisited joining the Big Ten."
> >
> > I am beginning to wonder if ND's problem is more "structural" than it
> > is simply a coaching problem.
> >
> > One thing that this article doesn't mention is that if ND stays in
> > their current relationship with the BE, ND's bowl scenarios are pretty
> > pathetic if they don't make the BCS in any given year. If they joined
> > the Big Ten, they would pretty much have to finish in the top half of
> > the conference...or maybe a little better...and they'll at worst be
> > playing in Florida on New Year's Day.
> >
> > Jon
>
> the dohmers are going to need a LOT of money to make the weis
> change.. A LOT of money.
Not if they can locate those photographs.
--
Michael Press