Who Owns a Folded Conference's Name Rights?

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3819

JPSchmack wrote:

Quinn wrote:

I agree with your theory. I just recall when the 2003 shakeup was happening and the idea of a split was just about coming to fruition, Notre Dame was expected to remain with the basketball schools.

Why? All the basics I mentioned such as the northeast markets (again, the largest markets for Notre Dame alumni are New York and Chicago) and the association with similar minded religious and academic schools. Also factor in the lack of pressure to join for all-sports by remaining with the basketball schools since there would be no football. Lastly, what's to say that the football schools even want an non-football member?

I don't think Notre Dame was expected to at all. There was no chance Kevin White moved Notre Dame in with basketball (He came from Tulane and saw what leaving the SEC to be with "like minded academic schools" did for their sports).

The association with schools of "similar budget" is more likely than "similar minded academic and religious."

Academically it doesn't get any better than the Ivy, but you think Notre Dame athletics would join that conference?

It's all about the (1) money and (2) the NCAA championship access. In the long run, leaving Marquette, DePaul and Xavier (catholic, regional rivals) back in the day was worth it because of the exposure the Big East brought.

Their non-revenue programs would lose A LOT from going with the basketball schools. And when you think about it, the basketball league is going to lose a lot too without Syracuse and UConn unless ESPN is behind the conference. If ESPN doesn't promote that league like they do the Big East, it becomes nothing but what the A-10 was from 1995-2001: The second best basketball league in the east coast. Look how their exposure and rep has dwindled.

And the football schools would want Notre Dame for the same reason the Big East wants Notre Dame now. They are Notre freaking Dame. They are rich, competitive in non-revenue sports, and there's a chance it leads to football games on their schedule at some point. They've always held out hope ND would join for football too.

Look, your Ivy League point ain't gonna work. Nobody had ever said that academics were the be-all and end-all in a decision making process. But they certainly are a factor along with money. As for money, where are these mythical numbers you have for TV contracts? it's not like Notre Dame would get a dime from the football revenue. And I'll admit I'm surprised to be reading a post about the potential of Notre Dame football when it comes to Big East scheduling. 12 years ago, maybe. But not now. Not when we've seen Big East schools put up a stink about the Notre Dame scheduling demands. And not when the Big East is moving away from having Notre Dame evne tied into potential bowl slots of theirs.

I don't disagree with your overall hope or prediction: that Notre Dame could go with the football schools. But what we know is this:
* Notre Dame had sided with the basketball schools during the discussions to split in 2003 following the potential losses of Miami, Syracuse and Boston College.
* The Big East has done what they can to ensure their schools get bowl bids over Notre Dame when both are eligible for the same bowls.
* Big East football schools have been very public about their dislike of the scheduling tactics used by Notre Dame.

We've seen crazier turnarounds before, so Notre Dame turning around and siding with the football schools could happen. But academics do matter. Losing so many of the stronger academic institutions (luckily still retaining good schools like Syracuse, UConn, Rutgers and Pitt) might be too much. Luckily the 16 team league takes the focus away from the poorer academic schools. That wouldn't be the case with a split, especially when the potential expansion candidates bring very little in that department...unless Army and Navy were ever considered.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3819

dafoeberezin3494 wrote:

Quinn wrote:

dafoeberezin3494 wrote:

If the 8 non-fb schools stayed together and depending on who they added (Xavier, Dayton, St. Louis?) they might remain all-Catholic as well as all-private. Would "Catholic Conference" work, or would these schools want to downplay that aspect from a marketing perspective (I have not heard of a conference yet that mentions a religion in its title)? Also, if Butler was one of the schools the conference would not be all-Catholic. Another possibility might be "Eastern Athletic Conference" although I bet most schools would not go for that (too much parallel to the WAC, a less prestigious BB conference).

There's a better chance that the conference name would be Ass Shit Crap League. There is NOOOOOO way that a conference would EVER use a single religious affiliation in the name, especially Catholic (as opposed to Protestant), when it would alienate so many others (potential consumers for the broadcast sponsors). Just ain't gonna happen. You've had the WCC that's been all Catholic and the WCC name has done plenty fine.

I thought this response was rather harsh, especially because I considered the possibility that the name "Catholic Conference" wouldn't work (I agree with Quinn that it would severely damage their marketability). So what names would work for a potential conference formed by half the Big East?

[*]Metro Conference: simple, formely existed and once included several current Big East members (did we ever answer the original question of this thread- who owns a folded conference's name rights?)
[*]Private Athletic Conference: FSA's suggestion
[*]Eastern Athletic Conference: my suggestion

Does anyone else have any good name ideas, or can anyone answer the original question of this thread?

It wasn't meant to be harsh towards anyone, just to highlight the virtual fact that no business, at a D1/borderlrine BCS level, trying to generate revenue across all demographics would ever use a religion in their name. Logic says "they are all catholic schools so how about a catholic name". But then the even more basic logic: it's a business, not a local CYO league . And for the record, 12 years catholic school for me.

Fresno St. Alum · **Joined:** Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm **Posts:** 2803

I'm Catholic too, but stayed away from Catholic school, too bad my mom made my brothers and sister go there from K-8th grade

JPSchmack · **Joined:** Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm **Posts:** 1038

Quinn wrote:

I don't disagree with your overall hope or prediction: that Notre Dame could go with the football schools. But what we know is this:
* Notre Dame had sided with the basketball schools during the discussions to split in 2003 following the potential losses of Miami, Syracuse and Boston College.

We've seen crazier turnarounds before, so Notre Dame turning around and siding with the football schools could happen.

Side with them on what, exactly? The basketball schools did not want to split up and neither did Notre Dame? That was the only thing for them to take sides on, and apparently most the football schools were on that side as well.

From the July 9, 2003 Big East meeting notes treat Notre Dame's side in the matter as common knowledge:
Mike Tranghese explains that if the conferences were to dissolve and the basketball component only have five members they would have no automatic bids for any sport. The NCAA could be petition for a waiver but that is an uncertain process.

(Emphasis mine)

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3819

JPSchmack wrote:

Quinn wrote:

I don't disagree with your overall hope or prediction: that Notre Dame could go with the football schools. But what we know is this:
* Notre Dame had sided with the basketball schools during the discussions to split in 2003 following the potential losses of Miami, Syracuse and Boston College.

We've seen crazier turnarounds before, so Notre Dame turning around and siding with the football schools could happen.

Side with them on what, exactly? The basketball schools did not want to split up and neither did Notre Dame? That was the only thing for them to take sides on, and apparently most the football schools were on that side as well.

From the July 9, 2003 Big East meeting notes treat Notre Dame's side in the matter as common knowledge:
Mike Tranghese explains that if the conferences were to dissolve and the basketball component only have five members they would have no automatic bids for any sport. The NCAA could be petition for a waiver but that is an uncertain process.

(Emphasis mine)

Yes, those were Trenghese's comments made early in July after the defection.

And then there were more direct inquiries made about Notre Dame:

"One plan being discussed is division into two new conferences, one consisting of the six members with Division I-A football teams, the other of the five that do not play football, and Notre Dame - NY Times (7/24/03)

"Notre Dame likely will continue to be a basketball-only member" - SI (8/13/03)

But the summation that makes the most sense?
"...With Notre Dame uncommitted to either side" - ProJo (11/5/03)

And that seemingly is where we are now, with Notre Dame uncommitted to either side.

One reason the Big East agreed to add Louisville, Cincy and USF...all football members...was because of Notre Dames voting role as the 8th basketball-only member. Remember, the Big East basketball schools could have kept the league at 15 teams, 7 football (Louisville, cincy) and 7 basketball (DePaul, Marquette) with Notre Dame as the wildcard. Voting in USF was done by the basketball schools because they would not have to give up all power to the football schools since Notre Dame was voting on their side. It's doubtful that the basketball schools would have voted in USF if it meant giving up the balance.

Quinn · **Joined:** Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am **Posts:** 3819

And all this said, I'm waiting on posting an article on the site that is about a future split and how the football schools now have all the power (regardless of Notre Dames role). But someone has to play devils advocate on assumptions, just as you are JP...which is why we post.

JPSchmack · **Joined:** Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm **Posts:** 1038

I'd put forth than a number of those articles around the time of the split had plenty of mis-information (like Xavier, Memphis, Temple, Army, Navy, etc, joining the Big East) and rely on the Big East minutes' quote of the commish.

The other thing to consider, is that usually, the truth lies somewhere between what you and are are arguing.

I read "Notre Dame uncommitted to either side" and that makes 100% sense with both our opinions.

You're infering Notre Dame can't/won't decide which group to go with. And I infer from that phrase:

#1 - Notre Dame was not committed to going with the hoops-only side in a split.
(because it jives with everything I've heard from the college athletics world that Notre Dame wants to be in a "BCS" conference for their non-football sports; and a league with the hoops schools wouldn't be that).

#2 - Notre Dame was not committed to joining a Big East football conference.
(Because they are committed to maintaining their football independence).

I also really think the 16-team model was done solely to ensure the conference integrity of 6 core members for five straight years on each side so that the conference COULD split in 2011.

Keep in mind that after the Mountain West forced the NCAA Tournament field to expand to 65 teams, the NCAA put a moratorium on new conferences getting auto bids. How much "power" is there when none of the 16 members WANT to expand and neither side CAN leave yet?

Who Owns a Folded Conference's Name Rights?

Who is online