Conference Realignment

I think I would phrase the lessons from UConn slightly differently (although they probably add up to the same thing). UConn has won 2 national championships in a row. By pursuing Big12 membership, they are saying they don’t think they can maintain that as members of a basketball only conference, as members of the Big East. If the ACC breaks up, it’s a pretty strong statement that moving to the Big East is not a smart option for us if we want to keep competing at the top of the sport.
I think it might be more accurate to say they have to make significant sacrifices to stay at the top. They have one of the highest paid coaches in the country, and seems like their NIL situation is at least reasonable (there was a recent coach poll that put their NIL situation at 13th nationally, which isn't the worst, though who knows how reliable any of that is). In the end, though, the state is significantly propping things up. They are funding significant renovations to both the XL center and Gampel....public funding that, say, Duke would never get.

The B12 still probably draws more bball money than BE, just because of the size of the league and it's alum bases. The BE has quality teams, but Providence and SHU aren't bringing in the eyeballs like even KSU. So Uconn probably would come out ahead there, even without a football payout, though with a path to getting back into a league there, it would be a great offer were it real.

On the football thing, some of the big challenge is having the stadium in hartford. The Rent got decent turnout during the Orlovsky era, but it's sad lately. Pulling in Mora as the coach says they're serious about trying to have some sort of competitive football, but it ain't going to happen without a league...it's one more hurdle than even Duke has.

On the B12 side, I think there are two parties that want this to happen:
1) B12 leadership believes that bball is an under-capitalized resource given the general growing popularity of the game on a macro scale. It will never reach fball, likely, but if their goal is to be a mid-high tier football conference with the best basketball, it's certainly not the worst niche to fill. In that vein, adding BYU, having baylor and kansas and houston, and seeking to add Uconn and Gonzaga, if the rumors are true, align with a strategic long term investment to solidify that position.

2) Uconn is the hottest basketball property that ESPN doesn't have a pie slice of. I think the "ESPN is in Connecticut!" thing is over-played, but not having the 2x defending champion, and hottest coach in the sport on the family must irk their brass a good deal. Getting together a package to solidify Uconn's future and take a slice of that pie makes sense.

So in the end, who isn't on board? The teams of the B12. Even if ESPN and the league could get a package that is financially neutral to all the other teams (which means ESPN is chipping in 30 million for Uconn, or some such), is the league in a better spot by having uconn than not? That's what the parties would have to convince the other schools, and pretty much where they're at as far as I understand.
 
I mean, okay.

So the fans at UConn don't care about football. And they excel in football. Therefore Duke should learn their lesson and the fans should care about football?

Or, the institution of Duke (which invests and cares a lot more about football than UConn) should do... more?

Again, I don't see how UConn is any sort of barometer for how Duke/fans should do/care/invest more regarding football.

UConn basketball has flourished without any meaningful football. That they are considering paying attention to football is a model for Duke to follow because...

I just don't see how these dots line up.

I do think conference realignment is 99% about football and to ignore that is potentially ignorant. But I don't understand what lessons we glean from UConn.
To boil down again, UConn is saying you can’t win or be competitive at the highest levels long-term as a basketball-only focused school. You need football money to support your basketball program (at a minimum) due to the new NIL and soon-to-be employment model. UConn has every reason to keep its current strategy of de-emphasizing football (and/or pursue a strategy of either removing football or dropping down to FCS). But in spite of that, they are willing to risk everything they have built and all the stability they have finally, finally gotten for themselves to make football work. And this is not because they want to at all, it’s because they think they HAVE to. Thats why this matters

Look it’s no secret I’m a Duke football fan first-and-foremost. And it’s painful for me (as pointed out by Mike Petrik above) to use this argument bc it demeans the team. But I’m saying even if you don’t care one iota about football at all and are purely a basketball-only fan, it is in your self-interest to care heavily about football bc it is a necessity to the long-term success of basketball (as evidenced by the actions of UConn, a like-minded school when it comes to their focus on basketball).

A dying or weak Duke football program means that Duke basketball will be in a worse position if / when the ACC collapses to find another home where we get enough money (the entire thing that matters here) to support hoops.

And remember, just getting an invite to, say, the B12, isn’t enough in the downside. You need B12 AND a full revenue share, which you may not get if you bring a really bad football program.

TLDR: You should care about Duke football until conference realignment settles, even if purely for self-serving reasons because you only care about basketball, as it is vital to basketball’s long-term survival, evidenced by UConn’s fairly drastic actions
 
I'm curious about the case of Gonzaga. I haven't followed the "basketball needs football" debate deeply enough to opine. To those of you who have been engaged in the debate, how does the Gonzaga case apply? They do have excellent basketball and no football, though I realize they haven't won a b-ball championship.

Thanks!
 
I think I would phrase the lessons from UConn slightly differently (although they probably add up to the same thing). UConn has won 2 national championships in a row. By pursuing Big12 membership, they are saying they don’t think they can maintain that as members of a basketball only conference, as members of the Big East. If the ACC breaks up, it’s a pretty strong statement that moving to the Big East is not a smart option for us if we want to keep competing at the top of the sport.
I might say it differently. They may be seeking to operate an athletic program at $130-140 million vs. $90 M today.
 
I'm curious about the case of Gonzaga. I haven't followed the "basketball needs football" debate deeply enough to opine. To those of you who have been engaged in the debate, how does the Gonzaga case apply? They do have excellent basketball and no football, though I realize they haven't won a b-ball championship.
I wonder how Gonzaga will continue to thrive into the future given what appear to be some NIL limitations in their program. The shadowy information we get seems to indicate Gonzaga is not among the top 20 NIL programs out there. The lack of a major conference affiliation -- and the money that brings to the program -- will, over the course of time, likely result in lesser facilities.

Last year, Gonzaga finished 12th at KenPom... a really good season but the first time they have been outside the top 10 in KenPom since 2016, when Brandon Ingram was at Duke. Most of the preseason rankings peg them fairly close to Duke, like around the #8-#10 team in the land. If they can maintain that then this is a highly successful program moving forward but I am not sold on that being the case a couple years from now. I think they need to get into a bigger conference payout situation as soon as they can.
 
I wonder how Gonzaga will continue to thrive into the future given what appear to be some NIL limitations in their program. The shadowy information we get seems to indicate Gonzaga is not among the top 20 NIL programs out there. The lack of a major conference affiliation -- and the money that brings to the program -- will, over the course of time, likely result in lesser facilities.

Last year, Gonzaga finished 12th at KenPom... a really good season but the first time they have been outside the top 10 in KenPom since 2016, when Brandon Ingram was at Duke. Most of the preseason rankings peg them fairly close to Duke, like around the #8-#10 team in the land. If they can maintain that then this is a highly successful program moving forward but I am not sold on that being the case a couple years from now. I think they need to get into a bigger conference payout situation as soon as they can.

Gonzaga would almost certainly benefit by an affiliation with either the Big 12 or a reconstituted Pac-X, but its most immediate problem is that Mark Few is 61 years old. Coach Few IS that program -- prior to his head coaching tenure, their only NCAA appearances were in 1995 and 1999, and Few was still an assistant for those years. We have yet to see if Gonzaga will remain relevant after he retires. The most obvious successor, former assistant Tommy Lloyd, already has a better job as head coach of Arizona.
 
To boil down again, UConn is saying you can’t win or be competitive at the highest levels long-term as a basketball-only focused school. You need football money to support your basketball program (at a minimum) due to the new NIL and soon-to-be employment model. UConn has every reason to keep its current strategy of de-emphasizing football (and/or pursue a strategy of either removing football or dropping down to FCS). But in spite of that, they are willing to risk everything they have built and all the stability they have finally, finally gotten for themselves to make football work. And this is not because they want to at all, it’s because they think they HAVE to. Thats why this matters

Look it’s no secret I’m a Duke football fan first-and-foremost. And it’s painful for me (as pointed out by Mike Petrik above) to use this argument bc it demeans the team. But I’m saying even if you don’t care one iota about football at all and are purely a basketball-only fan, it is in your self-interest to care heavily about football bc it is a necessity to the long-term success of basketball (as evidenced by the actions of UConn, a like-minded school when it comes to their focus on basketball).

A dying or weak Duke football program means that Duke basketball will be in a worse position if / when the ACC collapses to find another home where we get enough money (the entire thing that matters here) to support hoops.

And remember, just getting an invite to, say, the B12, isn’t enough in the downside. You need B12 AND a full revenue share, which you may not get if you bring a really bad football program.

TLDR: You should care about Duke football until conference realignment settles, even if purely for self-serving reasons because you only care about basketball, as it is vital to basketball’s long-term survival, evidenced by UConn’s fairly drastic actions
NIL$ paid out has nothing to do with football money earned. In order to have a strong football program, Duke and UConn would have to direct more NIL$ to football at the expense of basketball.

Duke football will never put butts in seats or drive viewership to demand comparatively large football payouts. So wanting football to succeed is fine but doesn’t change the facts. Might be worthwhile to have a plan that reflects reality instead of what you just really want.
 
Last edited:
NIL$ paid out has nothing to do with football money earned. In order to have a strong football program, Duke and UConn would have to direct more NIL$ to football at the expense of basketball.

Duke football will never put butts in seats or drive viewership to demand comparatively large football payouts. So wanting football to succeed is fine but doesn’t change the facts. Might be worthwhile to have a plan that reflects reality instead of what you just really want.
So fortunately / unfortunately, the reality of what I want and the facts on the ground for Duke basketball are very much aligned (which is why I’ve been posting on it here). The reality is that the interests of Duke basketball and Duke football are 100% aligned at this juncture. Look no further than the actions of UConn over the past week as evidence. If that wasn’t the case, we would not be having this conversation (see everything I have written)

Of course I want more people to care about Duke football, that’s no secret. I’m just highlighting that the development of UConn is a glaring sign of what I’ve been saying for years now. A really bad football program with no fan support will genuinely hurt basketball in the long term. Basketball-only schools are not a long-term viable option
 
Gonzaga would almost certainly benefit by an affiliation with either the Big 12 or a reconstituted Pac-X, but its most immediate problem is that Mark Few is 61 years old. Coach Few IS that program -- prior to his head coaching tenure, their only NCAA appearances were in 1995 and 1999, and Few was still an assistant for those years. We have yet to see if Gonzaga will remain relevant after he retires. The most obvious successor, former assistant Tommy Lloyd, already has a better job as head coach of Arizona.
Also on Gonzaga, idk. Not sold that Few is the program as much as was mentioned. There was mid-major success before he took the helm (Stockton years, the elite-8 run in the 90s, etc). If Few is the program, then you’d have to say the same thing about us to a large degree with K (which is fighting words here) and Beheim at Cuse. But you can survive to the next coach. Calhoun was all UConn had until it wasn’t.

You prob get 10-15 years of halo from a major coach. Think Georgetown with Thompson. If you can’t figure it out in that period, then I think you lose the continuity and have a problem.

Gonzaga will be fine for at least the next decade (assuming a static NIL situation, which is a major asterisk on this whole thing as that’s very, very unlikely; see UConn discussion over past 48-hrs)
 
One thing to keep in mind about Gonzaga is that the West Coast Conference basketball tournament is structured to give the Zags the best possible shot to make the NCAA tournament. The top 2 seeds in the conference are automatically slotted in the conference tournament semis, and the 3rd and 4th seeds are automatically slotted into the quarterfinals (basically equivalent to the ACC double bye). Since that started in 2003, Gonzaga has been in the conference finals every single time. Yay for never losing in the semis, I guess? Because of that structure, and BYU leaving the league, even under a different coach I'd expect them to be an NCAA regular out of that conference. It's very questionable that leaving that conference is in their long term best interest.
 
One thing to keep in mind about Gonzaga is that the West Coast Conference basketball tournament is structured to give the Zags the best possible shot to make the NCAA tournament. The top 2 seeds in the conference are automatically slotted in the conference tournament semis, and the 3rd and 4th seeds are automatically slotted into the quarterfinals (basically equivalent to the ACC double bye). Since that started in 2003, Gonzaga has been in the conference finals every single time. Yay for never losing in the semis, I guess? Because of that structure, and BYU leaving the league, even under a different coach I'd expect them to be an NCAA regular out of that conference. It's very questionable that leaving that conference is in their long term best interest.
I think the question is more on their ability to recruit at an elite level to compete for national titles, rather than just make the tournament
 
I might say it differently. They may be seeking to operate an athletic program at $130-140 million vs. $90 M today.
This is how I view it. UConn is looking to upgrade their overall athletic program. Not looking to save basketball. Hurley and crew are doing mighty fine in the Big East. 🙂
 
NIL$ paid out has nothing to do with football money earned. In order to have a strong football program, Duke and UConn would have to direct more NIL$ to football at the expense of basketball.
I got into a discussion of this on the podcast but your premise is wrong.

Athletic departments need to spend money on a lot of different things. Coaching salaries, scholarships, facilities, and other amenities are the biggest items. There are two ways to get the money for all that stuff -- earned income and donations from boosters.

Teams also increasingly need to spend money to succeed. It is becoming impossible to field a highly competitive team without a strong NIL program. There is only one way to get a strong NIL program -- donations from boosters.

So, a school that has a significantly higher earned income from TV revenues (and ticket sales) is going to be able to afford "stuff" without having to tap donors quite as significantly. As a result, those donors have more money they can funnel to NIL efforts.

Here is an example --

Let's say the Duke and UConn basketball programs both need to spend $22 million on facilities upgrades next year. Duke gets over $45 mil a year from its share of ACC TV deals. UConn makes something like $8 mil a year from the Big East... which program is going to have to dig deeper into donor's pockets to afford those upgrades? And, as a result, which program is going to have an easier time getting NIL dollars from their donors to build as good a team as possible?

The reality is quite clear to me. It will be waaaay easier to have a strong basketball program in the future if you have power conference money backing you up and freeing up donor dollars for NIL.
 
I got into a discussion of this on the podcast but your premise is wrong.

Athletic departments need to spend money on a lot of different things. Coaching salaries, scholarships, facilities, and other amenities are the biggest items. There are two ways to get the money for all that stuff -- earned income and donations from boosters.

Teams also increasingly need to spend money to succeed. It is becoming impossible to field a highly competitive team without a strong NIL program. There is only one way to get a strong NIL program -- donations from boosters.

So, a school that has a significantly higher earned income from TV revenues (and ticket sales) is going to be able to afford "stuff" without having to tap donors quite as significantly. As a result, those donors have more money they can funnel to NIL efforts.

Here is an example --

Let's say the Duke and UConn basketball programs both need to spend $22 million on facilities upgrades next year. Duke gets over $45 mil a year from its share of ACC TV deals. UConn makes something like $8 mil a year from the Big East... which program is going to have to dig deeper into donor's pockets to afford those upgrades? And, as a result, which program is going to have an easier time getting NIL dollars from their donors to build as good a team as possible?

The reality is quite clear to me. It will be waaaay easier to have a strong basketball program in the future if you have power conference money backing you up and freeing up donor dollars for NIL.
Agree with all of this. And that is not even getting into the potential disruptions from the employment model, which likely will include additional dollars for players based on a percentage of TV dollars (though the allocation of that between sports is up in the air). But with a very small payout for basketball-only conferences, you once again putting yourself at a massive competitive disadvantage (that would need even more NIL dollars to bridge).

This all gets back to the original point. We need to care about football as a fanbase (not Nina, she’s doing what she can to lure us) to make sure we’re best positioned to not only get an invite if / when the ACC collapses, but also ensure we get a FULL revenue share if / when that occurs. Thats the key. Bringing a shoddy football program with no fan support isn’t going to do it. Not saying we’re going to become ND, but saying we should at least try to be better than we are. There’s a lot of Duke basketball fans out there. Converting even a fraction to football fans (or at least into higher Nielsen ratings) would be huge
 
I got into a discussion of this on the podcast but your premise is wrong.

Athletic departments need to spend money on a lot of different things. Coaching salaries, scholarships, facilities, and other amenities are the biggest items. There are two ways to get the money for all that stuff -- earned income and donations from boosters.

Teams also increasingly need to spend money to succeed. It is becoming impossible to field a highly competitive team without a strong NIL program. There is only one way to get a strong NIL program -- donations from boosters.

So, a school that has a significantly higher earned income from TV revenues (and ticket sales) is going to be able to afford "stuff" without having to tap donors quite as significantly. As a result, those donors have more money they can funnel to NIL efforts.

Here is an example --

Let's say the Duke and UConn basketball programs both need to spend $22 million on facilities upgrades next year. Duke gets over $45 mil a year from its share of ACC TV deals. UConn makes something like $8 mil a year from the Big East... which program is going to have to dig deeper into donor's pockets to afford those upgrades? And, as a result, which program is going to have an easier time getting NIL dollars from their donors to build as good a team as possible?

The reality is quite clear to me. It will be waaaay easier to have a strong basketball program in the future if you have power conference money backing you up and freeing up donor dollars for NIL.
That’s all true. It would be much easier to do it with football money. But how is Duke going to get that money in the current environment? Duke’s current situation in the ACC is it’s very best option. Once that falls apart or runs out, Duke’s football earnings will be commensurate with the revenue it generates , which will be on the low end. So even if Duke receives kindness from strangers in the Big Whatever, it will be a much reduced payout. So, as I said before, it’s fine to want something unbelievable to happen but better to plan for reality.
 
To boil down again, UConn is saying you can’t win or be competitive at the highest levels long-term as a basketball-only focused school. You need football money to support your basketball program (at a minimum) due to the new NIL and soon-to-be employment model. UConn has every reason to keep its current strategy of de-emphasizing football (and/or pursue a strategy of either removing football or dropping down to FCS). But in spite of that, they are willing to risk everything they have built and all the stability they have finally, finally gotten for themselves to make football work. And this is not because they want to at all, it’s because they think they HAVE to. Thats why this matters

Look it’s no secret I’m a Duke football fan first-and-foremost. And it’s painful for me (as pointed out by Mike Petrik above) to use this argument bc it demeans the team. But I’m saying even if you don’t care one iota about football at all and are purely a basketball-only fan, it is in your self-interest to care heavily about football bc it is a necessity to the long-term success of basketball (as evidenced by the actions of UConn, a like-minded school when it comes to their focus on basketball).

A dying or weak Duke football program means that Duke basketball will be in a worse position if / when the ACC collapses to find another home where we get enough money (the entire thing that matters here) to support hoops.

And remember, just getting an invite to, say, the B12, isn’t enough in the downside. You need B12 AND a full revenue share, which you may not get if you bring a really bad football program.

TLDR: You should care about Duke football until conference realignment settles, even if purely for self-serving reasons because you only care about basketball, as it is vital to basketball’s long-term survival, evidenced by UConn’s fairly drastic actions
As long as don't have to watch it!
 
That’s all true. It would be much easier to do it with football money. But how is Duke going to get that money in the current environment? Duke’s current situation in the ACC is its very best option. Once that falls apart or runs out, Duke’s football earnings will be commensurate with the revenue it generates , which will be on the low end. So even if Duke receives kindness from strangers in the Big Whatever, it will be a much reduced payout. So, as I said before, it’s fine to want something unbelievable to happen but better to plan for reality.
I’m a numbers guy Lotusland. So let’s look at the data to figure this out.

Last year we had the fourth highest Nielsen average in ACC football at 2.64mm of the games sampled. That was ahead of UNC last year, behind only FSU, Clemson, and Miami. Now a part of that was Gameday week, which did 5.5mm. We’ll adjust for that in a second. But for context, the Duke-UNC basketball games last year were 2.63mm and 2.86mm, representing the #3 and #2 viewed regular season games, respectively. So in the sample, Duke football AVERAGED more eyeballs than all but one of our highest viewed basketball game last year. Yeah seriously, that fact was crazy to me too, but shows you the power of football

Now the sample set is admittedly small at only 6 games. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that we did zeros for the other 6 weeks. We know that isn’t true at all. But let’s assume it. That’s 1.32mm per week.

Now the ND game was a panacea given it was Gameday + ND. That was a 5.5mm. Let’s take that out of the dataset. With that adjusted, we’re at 2.07mm for the sample set (now 5) and 0.94mm assuming all other games not in the sample were zeros.

The current B12 members last year had a range of 0.7mm to 1.7mm in their sample set. I won’t go through the same math of ascribing zeros to all games not included, but would need to blend the figures down at least a little to adjust. But Duke’s bounds are 0.94mm to 2.07mm, and probably somewhere more towards the middle of that set. That’s more than comparable with the rest of the conference. And remember, this is just football.

What is my point here? This tells you that a competitive Duke football team CAN generate the eyeballs necessary to get us into a bigger conference with a full revenue share. BUT we need to be competitive for that to be feasible (which translates into better promotion of the game, better time slots, etc. that translate into higher Nielsen). And that’s setting aside the basketball team, which obviously has some value (as we all know).

If we’re competitive in football (which we showed is feasible through performance on the field), we can generate eyeballs for that product alone

We’re not going to be that good every year though, as we all know. But good viewership in the in between years helps bolster the argument that we have value and are worth taking at full price
 
Last edited:
Here is an example --

Let's say the Duke and UConn basketball programs both need to spend $22 million on facilities upgrades next year. Duke gets over $45 mil a year from its share of ACC TV deals. UConn makes something like $8 mil a year from the Big East... which program is going to have to dig deeper into donor's pockets to afford those upgrades? And, as a result, which program is going to have an easier time getting NIL dollars from their donors to build as good a team as possible?

The reality is quite clear to me. It will be waaaay easier to have a strong basketball program in the future if you have power conference money backing you up and freeing up donor dollars for NIL.
In UConn's case, they hit up the state government money pinata to cover the gap: https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news...pgrades-changing-sports-betting-laws/3264941/

That's a tenous long term position to be in for your funding to ebb and flow on the whims of politicians rather than a steady revenue stream.
 
I’m a numbers guy Lotusland. So let’s look at the data to figure this out.
[analysis omitted]
The item your lengthy analysis overlooked were the opponents. How many of the fans were there to see Duke, and how many were there to see Notre Dame, Clemson, F$U, or even (*shudder*) uNC? We played a lot of big-name teams at home last season. When you control for opponent, Duke is not in the top half of football audience draws in the power conferences, and possibly not in all of college football.
 
The item your lengthy analysis overlooked were the opponents. How many of the fans were there to see Duke, and how many were there to see Notre Dame, Clemson, F$U, or even (*shudder*) uNC? We played a lot of big-name teams at home last season. When you control for opponent, Duke is not in the top half of football audience draws in the power conferences, and possibly not in all of college football.
Reminds me of a story Dave Odom used to tell from his days coaching Wake Forest, where he'd been complaining for ages to Commissioner Swofford that Wake never got any national tv dates. So finally he gets a call from Swofford: "Dave, wonderful news - I got you a nationally televised game." "Great! Who's it with?" "I got you a game at UNC."
 
Back
Top