I'm More Convinced Than Ever: UConn & UVA to the B1G

[RegisteredUconn]

Umm, that would violate an ACC confidentiality agreement (which would have been signed upon initiation of ACC talks).

At some point somebody has to initiate a process that result in talks accompanied by confidentiality. In the time between initiation and confidentiality is a window where other discussions can occur without violating anything. This may, in fact, be part of the ACC's dilemma. If they approach UConn and we then contact the B1G which results in an invitation and acceptance to the B1G, it could make the ACC look even weaker in that they were interested and we rebuffed them.

 

[CTMike]

I'm not convinced of anything because we've been bent over too many times and frankly too self confident too many times.

That said I am confident we offer real value, haters be damned.

 

[Stray_Dog]

Arguing with the OP of this thread would be like arguing with someone's game of Dungeons and Dragons.

...Hmmm and reading your posts smacks of fantasy. You have not posted a single new radical idea in months. -but your negativity is worse than ever. You like UMASS to the AAC, you think we should go independent in football, etc. whatever your playing at, I would rather watch the nerds on the third floor in a dungeons & dragons tournament then to hear any more of your consistent and constant nagging of your arrogant perspective on why Ward is bad (many reasons - the latest the Ollie contract). So, if the OP is to Dungeons & Dragons, then NelsonMrMuntz is to Dante's Inferno, and we are stuck in the nine levels of hel!

 

[Stray_Dog]

At some point somebody has to initiate a process that result in talks accompanied by confidentiality. In the time between initiation and confidentiality is a window where other discussions can occur without violating anything. This may, in fact, be part of the ACC's dilemma. If they approach UConn and we then contact the B1G which results in an invitation and acceptance to the B1G, it could make the ACC look even weaker in that they were interested and we rebuffed them.

Right, but we were rebuffed by them, how many times? Sure we need the invite, but my theory is that whoever offers first, UConn will accept. We are not in a position to where our administrators trying to play games cost us an opportunity to leave the AAC. It is for this fact that many on here have the opinion that whoever invites us first gets an immediate acceptance letter with a promised parade and keys to the state of CT!

 

[TerryD]

Grant of Rights? People seem to forget about this. You would need 80% of the 15 ACC schools to vote to dissolve it.

I don't think that any one conference or one/two schools are going to want to challenge a GOR in court.

 

[CL82]

Grant of Rights? People seem to forget about this. You would need 80% of the 15 ACC schools to vote to dissolve it.

I don't think that any one conference or one/two schools are going to want to challenge a GOR in court.

That's the fly in the ointment isn't it? Unless, of course, the rumored ACC TV network contingency clause actually exists. In that case the recent Swofford announcement that it is a ways off might be an indication that change is coming.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

The OP scenario actually would be detrimental to getting in the B1G .
An ACC destruction model moves us down the pecking order.
The best that comes out of this is some of our old BiG east foes will have to turn to the AAC. Welcome to Big East football part two.

 

[CL82]

Kind of agree AZ but the BE/AAC brand is too devalued compare the to ACC brand. So what happens if the ACC implodes is that join the B1G and the better AAC schools, UConn included, would join the ACC. Not a great scenario, but any move to a P5 is an improvement.

 

[billybud]

From what our President said to the FSU boosters at our meeting...the ACC network was a contractual promise to "try to do" and not a sure thing...and that the contract stipulated that ESPN would add a couple of million per program if the network didn't take wing.

 

[BC1978]

That's the fly in the ointment isn't it? Unless, of course, the rumored ACC TV network contingency clause actually exists. In that case the recent Swofford announcement that it is a ways off might be an indication that change is coming.

The ONLY people who have mentioned such a clause are some of the WV bloggers - so take that for what its worth. Indeed, if such a clause were to exist, I am sure we would already have heard something about it following the announcement from the ACC that an ACC network is a way off, if ever. I don't think there ever was such a quid pro quo because the ACC never promised a network - only that it was under active study, with the league committed to look into its feasibility.

 

[CL82]

The ONLY people who have mentioned such a clause are some of the WV bloggers - so take that for what its worth. Indeed, if such a clause were to exist, I am sure we would already have heard something about it following the announcement from the ACC that an ACC network is a way off, if ever. I don't think there ever was such a quid pro quo because the ACC never promised a network - only that it was under active study.

Has the GOR ever been released? One would think that would be a very easy way to put that rumor to rest.

 

[Dooley]

From what our President said to the FSU boosters at our meeting...the ACC network was a contractual promise to "try to do" and not a sure thing...and that the contract stipulated that ESPN would add a couple of million per program if the network didn't take wing.

Which would still fall WAY short of the PAC, B1G and coming SEC revenue stream. The ACC needs its own network. Let the B12 become the conference that other P5s circle like vultures. The ACC has a chance to be really successful in both major sports for a long time and would threaten the SEC and B1G if it had its own network. Until then, these CR rumors involving ACC schools will always swirl.

 

[CTGoonie]

when did the NCAA officially change the rules allowing #2 ???

They haven't yet but are expected to within 6 months.

 

[BC1978]

Has the GOR ever been released? One would think that would be a very easy way to put that rumor to rest.

I am not aware that it has been published. That said, the ONLY place where such a clause has been brought up is in the WV blogs which, IMO, tell you all you need to know. It supposedly has been patterned after the B12's GOR. Not sure why the ACC would feel compelled to publish it. This seems only an issue with some of the WVU bloggers, which, again, IMO, tells you all you need to know.

 

[billybud]

We have to crystal ball that revenue stream from the PAC 12 and Big 12....the PAC 12, for instance, led in revenue in 2012-13...but had huge expenses....leading to a $19.8 million payout per program. That isn't a world beating figure.

 

[Fishy]

Every conference has a clause dealing with dissolution, so I'm sure one exists in terms of the grant of rights. But I think there is zero chance it's ever exercised - the simple truth is that all but perhaps UNC and UVa don't have any real value to another conference.

 

[BC1978]

Which would still fall WAY short of the PAC, B1G and coming SEC revenue stream. The ACC needs its own network. Let the B12 become the conference that other P5s circle like vultures. The ACC has a chance to be really successful in both major sports for a long time and would threaten the SEC and B1G if it had its own network. Until then, these CR rumors involving ACC schools will always swirl.

Well, the ONLY places these rumors still swirl is in the WV blogs so I don't think the ACC is too concerned about that.

FWIW, I think the ACC is correct in holding off on a network. IMO, the winds of technological change are blowing and I think it could (not necessarily "will", but "could") impact the current cable model which has been in place for quite some time. I think it is sound strategy to see how these changes might impact conference networks prior to taking the leap. That way, they can learn from the others on what to do, and what to avoid.

At one time, not very long ago, video stores dotted every town in the country. Land lines ruled in every household. People got music through CD's. People watched movies on VHS tapes, then DVDs, then Blu-Ray. Compare that to what is evolving today in these areas.

What does the future hold? I don't know, but the data in the attached article is quite revealing.

http://variety.com/2014/tv/news/cor...-of-tv-channels-available-to-them-1201172883/

 

[Dooley]

Well, the ONLY places these rumors still swirl is in the WV blogs so I don't think the ACC is too concerned about that.

FWIW, I think the ACC is correct in holding off on a network. IMO, the winds of technological change are blowing and I think it could (not necessarily "will", but "could") impact the current cable model which has been in place for quite some time. I think it is sound strategy to see how these changes might impact conference networks prior to taking the leap. That way, they can learn from the others on what to do, and what to avoid.

At one time, not very long ago, video stores dotted every town in the country. Land lines ruled in every household. People got music through CD's. People watched movies on VHS tapes, then DVDs, then Blu-Ray. Compare that to what is evolving today in these areas.

What does the future hold? I don't know, but the data in the attached article is quite revealing.

http://variety.com/2014/tv/news/cor...-of-tv-channels-available-to-them-1201172883/

Good points. For all we know, internet streaming services could be more lucrative than TV networks. I'm going to guess that conferences will figure out a way to do this too, should it come down to it.

 

[BC1978]

Good points. For all we know, internet streaming services could be more lucrative than TV networks. I'm going to guess that conferences will figure out a way to do this too, should it come down to it.

IMO, the most interesting thing in the article was how few channels the average American watches. I know I can relate to that as far as what I actually watch, as compared to how much I watch through my Apple TV. I don't think it is surprising that people are starting to look at their cable bills and compare them to the number of channels they actually watch. Just my opinion - and I am not sure of the economics of this - but I gotta think that a la carte pricing, in some form, is only a matter of time.

 

[Kolumbo]

One can only watch a limited amount of tv per day. Let's say a typical person gets home, watches the news, a sitcom, a sporting event or a movie. You can pile on the channels but he's still only watching a few channels that night. The only thing I really need is high speed internet and given the prices, I'm about ready to cut off tv altogether.

 

[Dooley]

IMO, the most interesting thing in the article was how few channels the average American watches. I know I can relate to that as far as what I actually watch, as compared to how much I watch through my Apple TV. I don't think it is surprising that people are starting to look at their cable bills and compare them to the number of channels they actually watch. Just my opinion - and I am not sure of the economics of this - but I gotta think that a la carte pricing, in some form, is only a matter of time.

I agree with you. A la carte is going to happen in the next few years. I *think* that conferences will position themselves for this with things like B1G2, B1G3, etc to house their games. I'm not sure how schools with their own networks will be affected. Conferences with their own networks may decide to shun schools with their own networks or they might figure out a way to integrate. I do think that schools with their own networks will be ahead of the curve if online streaming ever takes off. They'll know how to group and package their content and offer it in a variety of ways.

Personally speaking, I watch very few channels. NBCSN lately because of the hockey playoffs. I bought the MLB.tv package (which is friggin' outstanding, by the way). As for college sports, I keep it to UCONN only the majority of the time. I will watch other schools in the instance that it may affect UCONN somehow (ex - NCAA Tourney). But I realize that I'm the freakish outlier with outrageous, some might say, idiotic principles. I've actually flirted with the idea of trimming my cable all the way down to basic.

Aside: how do you like the Apple TV?

 

[BC1978]

I agree with you. A la carte is going to happen in the next few years. I *think* that conferences will position themselves for this with things like B1G2, B1G3, etc to house their games. I'm not sure how schools with their own networks will be affected. Conferences with their own networks may decide to shun schools with their own networks or they might figure out a way to integrate. I do think that schools with their own networks will be ahead of the curve if online streaming ever takes off. They'll know how to group and package their content and offer it in a variety of ways.

Personally speaking, I watch very few channels. NBCSN lately because of the hockey playoffs. I bought the MLB.tv package (which is friggin' outstanding, by the way). As for college sports, I keep it to UCONN only the majority of the time. I will watch other schools in the instance that it may affect UCONN somehow (ex - NCAA Tourney). But I realize that I'm the freakish outlier with outrageous, some might say, idiotic principles. I've actually flirted with the idea of trimming my cable all the way down to basic.

Aside: how do you like the Apple TV?

I really like Apple TV, Dooley. Lots of content, but I mostly link to my iTtunes account where I can watch movies on my big screen that I have either bought or rented. The picture is 1080p, with the highest digital sound quality that sounds great coming through the sound bar. Also stream Netflix, YouTube, etc. through it.

Amount the other things you can get through subscription are huluplus, MLB.TV, NBA, and NHL. Lots of other stuff too.

To my point above, I used to buy a lot DVD movies, then blu-Ray movies. Now I stream them onto my TV, iPad Air, or iPhone.

The footprint for the Apple TV is just a small cube and fits anywhere.

 

[Fishy]

ESPN has kicked the proposed ACC network down the road. There are no plans.

The biggest problem with something like the Apple TV as a cord-cutting device is that so much of the stuff on it requires authentication through a cable subscription.

We have a couple of Apple TVs and like them, though. I've also hooked a Mac Mini up to one of the televisions and that's something of an Apple TV on steroids. Although you can do it with an iPhone/iPad with Airplay, it makes Amazon Prime a little more convenient and also lets you watch channels that exist only on the web through a browser.

So I don't really see a la carte or cord-cutting coming any time soon, but if nothing else, being able to watch what you pay for is now much more convenient - anything with a screen is now a television.

 

[MTHusky]

Fishy,

"So I don't really see a la carte or cord-cutting coming any time soon, but if nothing else, being able to watch what you pay for is now much more convenient - anything with a screen is now a television." Dam, been staring at my screen door for the last 15 min. and I'm not receiving anything! Can you help me?

 

[Pudge]

On this day that we found out the LA Clippers ARE worth $2B, I am going to refer Fishy and the rest of you to the ESPN article on Dayton, George Mason and Wichita State.

Of course UConn is worth more than $2B ... and maybe we are worth the $12.9B theorized by our Leader.