Depaul looking for a new coach

[unclejohn]

Brian Wardle would be a solid hire. He knows how to work with low budgets at Green Bay.

Yeah, and that's one reason he is now at Bradley.

[MulliganMusings]

I wonder if people still think Dayton would be a bad addition to the Big East? I would be happy to take Dayton over the current iteration of DePaul.

[Alan Bykowski, "brewcity77"]

I wonder if people still think Dayton would be a bad addition to the Big East? I would be happy to take Dayton over the current iteration of DePaul.

Maybe we could offer DePaul, a home and home series for each A10 team, and Fordham's choice of any one Big East assistant in exchange for Dayton?

[Goose85]

I wonder if people still think Dayton would be a bad addition to the Big East? I would be happy to take Dayton over the current iteration of DePaul.

They play in Chicago, that means a lot of tv sets.

DePaul needs some type of momentum heading into their new arena, and I'm not sure this is the coach to do it.

You have to wonder what the administration at DePaul is doing. *Are they so restricting the AD from a financial commitment to the program standpoint that this is the best the AD can do? *

I could just see this - AD to Administration: I've got two really good candidates, Drew and Hurley. *They both want this $$$ salary and a recruiting budget of $$$. *

Admin to AD: Don't you know we are building a new facility, we don't have that kind of money. Remember when we were in the NCAA a decade or so ago? I heard things haven't worked out so well for him after he left, see if he would come back for $ and no change to the recruiting budget.

Could it be that the Administration is fine spending less and letting the AD take all the heat in exchange for her keeping her job and not complaining?

[Mucrisco]

They play in Chicago, that means a lot of tv sets.

DePaul needs some type of momentum heading into their new arena, and I'm not sure this is the coach to do it.

You have to wonder what the administration at DePaul is doing. *Are they so restricting the AD from a financial commitment to the program standpoint that this is the best the AD can do? *

I could just see this - AD to Administration: I've got two really good candidates, Drew and Hurley. *They both want this $$$ salary and a recruiting budget of $$$. *

Admin to AD: Don't you know we are building a new facility, we don't have that kind of money. Remember when we were in the NCAA a decade or so ago? I heard things haven't worked out so well for him after he left, see if he would come back for $ and no change to the recruiting budget.

Could it be that the Administration is fine spending less and letting the AD take all the heat in exchange for her keeping her job and not complaining?

This is on honest question: How much does that matter?

What I mean is, do advertisers just look at the market size to determine what they are going to spend? Or, do they look at TV ratings? Our FS1 numbers are not good and I don't think people in Chicago are watching the Big East due to Depaul. On the other hand, the potential for them to watch due to Depaul is there.

[Goose85]

This is on honest question: How much does that matter?

What I mean is, do advertisers just look at the market size to determine what they are going to spend? Or, do they look at TV ratings? Our FS1 numbers are not good and I don't think people in Chicago are watching the Big East due to Depaul. On the other hand, the potential for them to watch due to Depaul is there.

Why did the Big 10 want Rutgers? Rutgers increases the amount the BTN can get cable / dish companies to pay / charge customers each month for the BTN in the New York, New Jersey area. If you can go from $.10 per month to $1.00 per month for each cable / dish subscriber that is big money, even if Rutgers never wins a Big 10 title.

I'm not sure Fox has the same setup, but if DePaul and St. John's became very good again, could Fox increase the monthly charge to cable companies for Fox sports?

If DePaul were to improve, that could immediately add viewers in a big market, same with St. John's.
If Dayton were to be in the Big East, and they improved to the point they were an annual tourney team, is there a big upside for Fox?

[IrwinFletcher]

I believe that the BTN and FS1 operate differently. You are talking about a network (FS1) giving a conference a contract for x $'s to televise their games.

The other (BTN) is a network owned by the conference that gets the $'s direct for the carriers and therefore there is no contract between the network and conference.

[TheSultan]

I believe that the BTN and FS1 operate differently. You are talking about a network (FS1) giving a conference a contract for x $'s to televise their games.

The other (BTN) is a network owned by the conference that gets the $'s direct for the carriers and therefore there is no contract between the network and conference.

Fox owns 51% of the BTN and handles all of its operations.

[IrwinFletcher]

Fox owns 51% of the BTN and handles all of its operations.

That is fine, but it is still two different scenarios.

When Rutgers joined the Big 10ish, the BTN was added to the cable/satellite packages for residents in the area. So subscribers saw their costs go up a dime (or a quarter or a dollar, whatever it was). In turn, a portion of that revenue to the cable/satellite companies was paid out to the BTN. And when you are talking 10 million households, thats a lot of money.

The FS1 contract with the BE (or the ESPN contract with the ACC) is a dollar fee for a certain amount of time paid to the conferences for televising those events.

If you want a more detailed explanation, maybe we can get Chicos over here to do a better job than i do.

[TheSultan]

No I understand what you are saying. Thanks.