And in even more good news, ESPN: "Sources: 7th access bowl unlikely" | Page 2 | The Boneyard

And in even more good news, ESPN: "Sources: 7th access bowl unlikely"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Carl Spackler said:
I clearly wrote something without really thinking about how it was going to be understood.
Expand ...

Yup, you did.

But you admit that to BL- who, by the way, interpreted it the same as I did- whereas in my case, it's a matter of reading comprehension. That's odd.

You should work on your writing skills.
 
Carl Spackler said:
Very poor understanding of what I've written. Don't let your personal feelings about what I write and how I write it get in the way. The media polling system is incredibly biased, and where you finish in the rankings, unless you go 12-0, is entirely dependant upon where you start in the rankings, before the season even starts.
Expand ...
Exactly, and that occurs because the perception of the Big East is that it's a weak mid-major conference, which is precisely the problem with being in the Big East. We are a mid-major football program in everyone else's eyes.
 
NutmegState said:
Aresco said Saturday night in Boise that the 7th Bowl is going to happen. Lets stick with that for now.
Expand ...

I heard him say it again as recently as this morning on Yahoo radio with Tim Brando. Either Aresco doesn't want to give up what he knows, the ESPN report is bull, or he has been blindsided by this.
 
Prediction: A seventh bowl is all but assured at some point. If not now, then in the near future. It won't matter what it's called, nor have any specific conference affiliation. Once the BCS gets a taste of all the money from the 4 team playoff, do you not think they will devise an immediate plan to expand the tournement? My guess is by 2024, the top 10 BCS ranked teams will make up the tourney with 2 play-in games. It will build up to that in the meantime. That means 9 bowl games that count by year 10 of the new format. The rest will continue to be what they are now...exhibitions.
 
Brett McMurphy's sources are NOT infallible & sometimes they have an agenda.

LOOK ... we have a solid grouping of Teams outside the Power conference. Some may have great eyeball draws. A Boise or a Rutgers could bring in better numbers than a #3 B1G versus a #1ACC; hence you have a very imperfect market. I believe a 7th Bowl is not that hard a lift. I believe with Fox & NBC & CBS ... with ESPN ... there is enough interest to Market a game for the All-Everything Else group versus the best match available.

Or just do away with the damn Bowl system.

(I NOTICE SOMETIMES WHEN I SEND POSTS FROM MY iPHONE, THEY HAVE BIG ERRORS IN THEM)
 
.-.
Pudge said:
Brett McMurphy's sources are NOT infallible nor & sometimes they have an agenda.

LOOK ... we have a solid grouping of Teams outside the Power conference. Some may have great eyeball draws. A Boise or a Rutgers could bring in better numbers than a #3 B1G versus a #1ACC; hence you have a very imperfect market. I believe a 7th Bowl is not that hard a life. I believe with Fox & NBC & CBS ... with ESPN ... there is enough interest to Market a game for the All-Everything Else group versus the best match available.

Or just do away with the damn Bowl system.
Expand ...
Ain't gonna matter. The best teams will be in tournement. The rest will be what the non-BCS Championship games are now. Heavy regional interest and from participating school alumni, with some passing interest sprinkled in.
 
MattMang23 said:
I understood you. I understood you to write that RU and UL are being given a biased review due to the mismanagement of the BE and the perceived poor relationship between the media and that conference.

Funny, they treat BE bball pretty fairly.

Carl, it's not my interpretation. Next time you want someone to interpret something the way you mean it, you should write it so it's interpreted that way.
Expand ...

Well, actually it is your interpretation. What I was thinking about, and focused on, in the post that I think started this, was much more about the changes coming in the college football world, not the ranking systems and big east bias in the media.

The rest of this that this discussion has devolved into regarding that, I've simply brought on myself for writing they way I do about the things I write about around here. I guess people remember things though, so that's pretty cool.
 
MattMang23 said:
Yup, you did.

But you admit that to BL- who, by the way, interpreted it the same as I did- whereas in my case, it's a matter of reading comprehension. That's odd.

You should work on your writing skills.
Expand ...


Nah, I'm happy just writing the way I do. Sooner or later I"ll figure out how to get paid for it.
 
Pudge said:
Brett McMurphy's sources are NOT infallible nor & sometimes they have an agenda.

LOOK ... we have a solid grouping of Teams outside the Power conference. Some may have great eyeball draws. A Boise or a Rutgers could bring in better numbers than a #3 B1G versus a #1ACC; hence you have a very imperfect market. I believe a 7th Bowl is not that hard a life. I believe with Fox & NBC & CBS ... with ESPN ... there is enough interest to Market a game for the All-Everything Else group versus the best match available.

Or just do away with the damn Bowl system.
Expand ...


I know everybody thinks I see conspiracy everywhere in the world, but I don't. What I see, is BS information vs. credible information.
 
Carl Spackler said:
I know everybody thinks I see conspiracy everywhere in the world, but I don't. What I see, is BS information vs. credible information.
Expand ...
Okay. Where is the credible information that the networks are dying to get a BE champ in a big time bowl game in the same neighborhood as the Rose, Champs bowl? Because if there isn't any, it means the alternative (the payout would be low) is probably more likely to be true, fantasies and conspiracy theories nonwithstanding. Of course, the thing about conspiracy theories is that all evidence to the contrary means the conspiracy must be casting a wider and wider net.
 
businesslawyer said:
Rutgers has a low status because of the mismanagement of the Big East conference? Rutgers had a low status for over a century before there was a Big East conference.
Expand ...

There in lies the rub and a personification of the problem built into the "new" system. Rutgers is being discounted because of its past.The same is probably true of Miss. State (mentioned above). I'll bet there are voters who don't know that either school is undefeated.
 
.-.
junglehusky said:
Okay. Where is the credible information that the networks are dying to get a BE champ in a big time bowl game in the same neighborhood as the Rose, Champs bowl? Because if there isn't any, it means the alternative (the payout would be low) is probably more likely to be true, fantasies and conspiracy theories nonwithstanding. Of course, the thing about conspiracy theories is that all evidence to the contrary means the conspiracy must be casting a wider and wider net.
Expand ...

hold on - who said the big east was going to get a bowl game contract with a payout on par with the rose bowl? There's nothing in the market to indicate that, you are falling into the trap. There's also nothing in the market to support the ESPN writer's statements of value.

THe next contract that the big east conference signs on for the champ to play in a specific bowl game, will be the first contract with a specific bowl game that the big east football conference has had for it's champion, since the league was founded in 1991.

It is what it is, don't be fooled by garbage information, we should have had a contract in place for our champion with a specific bowl for over 20 years ago, but the former leadership, didn't think it was important.

What the value of such a game will be? Well the entire reality of the Big East value, including a bowl game featuring a big east conference champ, will be known, not too long from now.
 
Carl Spackler said:
Oh man.....sorry dude. I see what you did there now, and I missed it. Sorry. McMurphy is the ultimate cross-reference, strawman source builder in the industry.
Expand ...

Doesn't that just make McMurphy like the one poster here who quoted himself? Maybe there is a Boneyarder destined for an ESPN blogger paycheck!
 
Carl Spackler said:
I clearly wrote something without really thinking about how it was going to be understood. The simple bias in college football is that pre-season ranking, are directly related to final season polling. THe media and coaches polling, prior to any season even starting - had DIRECT effect on the final rankings. THe big east conference football wing, did very, very little self promotion in teh system for years, while the coaches and programs, and media followings in conferences like the SEC, Big 10, and Big 12, were openly talking about voting for only their own conference programs in all polls, and well aware of how the system works,.....the big east sat by and actually was naive enough, or uppity enough, depending on your point of view - not to sink to that level - to self promote.
Expand ...

Agree with almost all of that.
 
businesslawyer said:
Doesn't that just make McMurphy like the one poster here who quoted himself? Maybe there is a Boneyarder destined for an ESPN blogger paycheck!
Expand ...

That was a hilarious moment, by the way. Who was that? Was it 990411?
 
This is like MHVER3 quoting one of his alter egos. That is quoting someone else's.

Or even someone linking a satirical realignment thread on three other major message boards and twitter. But that never happens. Right.
 
.-.
The more I think about the timing of this release, after having this bowl on the table for most of August, September and October, then 1 week before the Big East exclusive negotiating window is going to expire, this leak, there is no other conclusion than ESPN made this leak to help their negotiating position with the Big East and scare off other bidders by devaluing the Big East.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
The more I think about the timing of this release, after having this bowl on the table for most of August, September and October, then 1 week before the Big East exclusive negotiating window is going to expire, this leak, there is no other conclusion than ESPN made this leak to help their negotiating position with the Big East and scare off other bidders by devaluing the Big East.
Expand ...

Let's just say this, the timing of this leak isn't just a coincidence.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Also, the Big East and non-power conference have already probably sent the BCS a draft of their anti-trust lawsuit, which the BCS would have about a 90% chance of losing.
Expand ...
Right on the nose. This whole conference realignment nonsense and BCS bowl nonsense stinks to high heaven of collussion and restraint of trade. If this was pursued and discovery taken, there would be a lot of a$$es sitting in the frying pan.
 
Help me out. There have been discussions about the 7th big bowl game, involving Aresco and the BE, presumably non-BCS conferences, and possibly "power five" conferences who would send a 2nd or 3rd place team to this bowl. The discussions presumably involve ESPN, but other networks too (why would they be exclusive to ESPN/Disney?). This is independent ofthe ESPN / BE contract negotiations, right? I can get the theory that ESPN would downplay the BE as part of a campaign to bring down the BE's price - if the BE winds up signing with ESPN during the window. It looks like that's not going to happen, but the main point being - there are more parties involved in the 7th bowl game besides just ESPN. So what benefit does ESPN get out of pushing the market value of the 7th bowl game down???

When Dick Cheney anonymously fed (false) intel on Saddam's metal tubes to the NY Times, and then cited that report on Meet the Press as if it were independently sourced information that backed up his WMD argument to invade Iraq, he had a clear benefit with no downside to it. (That is, until the troops went to the supposed WMD sites and found no WMDs). If ESPN is engaging in a propaganda campaign against the BE... specifically in relation to the value of the 7th bowl game, there's no clear benefit since any other network, FOX, NBC/Comcast, Turner, CBS/Viacom can just buy the bowl game if they decide it's worth it - regardless of what McMurphy's sources are saying.

Am I wrong? are the 7th bowl game contract and the BE TV contract tied together somehow other than in the perceived market value of the BE? I just don't understand the conspiracy here, if someone can explain it to me and provide evidence other than "the timing is supsicious" or "ESPN hates the BE" I might be willing to consider.
 
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...t-commish-seventh-playoff-bowl-alive-and-well

Don't pay attention to internet chatters. Read what the BIg EAst commish had to say - TODAY.

McMurphy, just did an incredibly ugly hack job of an article, and don't make any mistake, this bowl game - is entirely about the Big East, and ESPN owns the BCS arrangement right now, which currently are the "access" points for playoff games into the national playoff. Just look at the title of McMurphy's article.

I don't think a guy like Mike Aresco, is going to be blindsided by information, the way former leaders of this conference were. I could be wrong about that. We'll see.

Always follow the money - there are big time negotiations going on, and you haven't heard a peep from anybody on one side - about money, and we are 5 days from going to open market.
 
Tweets All / No replies
4m​
Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN
He also said Big East had shot at Orange Bowl RT @JFowlerCBS: Blog: #BigEast commish Mike Aresco says seventh playoff bowl alive and well

Collapse



  • 1RETWEET​
  • ​
9:47 AM - 25 Oct 12 · Details

Ralph D. Russo ‏@ralphDrussoAP
Just because ESPN prints money doesn't mean it's looking to give it away.

Expand
15m​

Ralph D. Russo ‏@ralphDrussoAP
Main stumbling block on 7th game seems pretty obvious: Does TV partner want it? How much will they pay? .... (more)

Expand


Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs
Scott says decision on seventh bowl is 6-9 months down the road.

Expand
37m​

Dennis Dodd ‏@dennisdoddcbs
"Whether there are going to be six of seven (bowls), that's an open question ... Any speculation on a seventh bowl is premature." Scott

Expand

Let's back up for a minute. Way back when, when the Big East was fighting for survival, all we heard about was AQ status. Retaining AQ status was the most important part of the Big East's expansion plans. The narrative changed because the Big East was stripped of its AQ status.

Fast forward to today, the Big East has been stripped of its AQ status. The BCS largely remains in place, with the playoff layer added on. Now that there are contract bowls, that is bowls that automatically take certain conferences' teams, the Big East finds itself on the outside looking in. Aresco has to figure out what to do, since the framework for the playoffs has already been decided, as has the access bowls and contract bowls. The incentive to add the Gilligan Bowl is there only if it makes people money AND it makes the pesky little dog stop barking. Larry Scott used to be a big proponent of the 7th bowl, or so we have been told. But since it was leaked that the Pac 12 would be forced to send one of its top teams to the bowl, his tune has changed. I guess Oregon and USC don't like the idea of playing against the best of the worst.

Now the problem isn't Aresco. Unfortunately he came into the game too late. The BCS meetings were conducted with the President of Louisville as the BE representative. At that meeting, the playoff access bowls and contract bowls were born.

So now Aresco is forced to deal with SDSU and Boise State and the chaos of a coast to coast college conference, as well as a system in which by any objective observer, the Big East has been relegated as a nonpower conference.

Aresco will fight, and fight well, but in the end, his voice doesn't matter to Slive, Delaney, Scott, Bowlsby nor Swofford.
 
.-.
Jeremy Fowler ‏@JFowlerCBS
RT @McMurphyESPN: He also said Big East had shot at Orange Bowl RT @JFowlerCBS: Blog: Mike Aresco says seventh playoff bowl alive and well

So now McMurphy @ ESPN is openly mocking the Big East Commissioner and a peer @ CBS. Nice!
 
Carl Spackler said:
I don't think a guy like Mike Aresco, is going to be blindsided by information, the way former leaders of this conference were. I could be wrong about that. We'll see.
Expand ...



Sure. But the 7th bowl game could have happened by now, and it hasn't. Instead of assuming this because ESPN is somehow magically stopping it from happening because they're trying to devalue the BE (and they are doing the latter), I'll go with the more parsimonious explanation that it just isn't profitable enough for the networks and other conferences that would be involved for it to go forward. And if it winds up not happening, it doesn't mean Aresco was blindsided, or not. It means he couldn't convince others there was value in a 7th bowl game worth investing in.
 
Until a television deal is negotiated take all this with a pinch of salt.
 
junglehusky said:
Sure. But the 7th bowl game could have happened by now, and it hasn't. Instead of assuming this because ESPN is somehow magically stopping it from happening because they're trying to devalue the BE (and they are doing the latter), I'll go with the more parsimonious explanation that it just isn't profitable enough for the networks and other conferences that would be involved for it to go forward. And if it winds up not happening, it doesn't mean Aresco was blindsided, or not. It means he couldn't convince others there was value in a 7th bowl game worth investing in.
Expand ...


Umm - where did I say that ESPN is magically stopping something? All I've pointed out, is that there is absolutely no credibility, to the ESPN article.
 
Aresco also recently said that the Big East basketball conference is as strong as ever and there is no question the Big East remains the premier basketball conference.

So what happens when a conference commissioner says something that is clearly wrong - is it still right because a conference commissioner said so?
 
It's just spin. At least Aresco is fighting, Marinatto just bent over and took it.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,331
Messages
4,564,781
Members
10,464
Latest member
Rollskies27


Top Bottom