B1G

[Mr. Wonderful]

By every raw infrastructure metric, UConn is a peewee compared to the B1G universities. We'd be competing with Northwestern for mascot status.

We would certainly compete in basketball. We've got that covered. But could we live up to the $40 million projections being discussed in the BTN contract? Is UConn's footprint big enough to produce a BTN subscription rate that could cover its end of the bargain?

You look at the schools who have the footprint to cover those ends of the bargain, and you'll see who the B1G will add.

Virginia could. UNC could. Georgia Tech probably could, even as a distant second in its own state.

And by BTN network model standards, Rutgers has a great chance of meeting their end. The sports of local state universities are never left out of standard cable packages in their home states, no matter how lousy the team actually plays. That's the real kick in the nuts. Success has no baring on this at all. Rutgers got the invite because New Jersey packs a lot of people into a small space - enough to make the subscriber numbers work.

We're going to be left with the non-state schools, the Syracuse's, the Wake Forest's, etc. Unless we are thrown a bone...we are Huskies afterall.

 

[Adios]

We're going to be left with the non-state schools, the Syracuse's, the Wake Forest's, etc. Unless we are thrown a bone...we are Huskies afterall.

How about seeing results first before we come to conclusions? The extreme pessimism on this board is sickening. The women's basketball team has more "balls" than some people here.

 

[UConn9604]

We would certainly compete in basketball. We've got that covered. But could we live up to the $40 million projections being discussed in the BTN contract? Is UConn's footprint big enough to produce a BTN subscription rate that could cover its end of the bargain?

I don't know if we would have to bring $30-40 million by ourselves. Rutgers wasn't selected because of how well it performs in its own footprint; it was selected in part because it would provide other Big Ten schools' alumni a way to connect with their alma mater in person and on television. There are sizable chunks of Big Ten alumni in the New York City area (e.g., Penn State, Michigan) and I am sure they will be thrilled to have regular games against Rutgers in their backyard, and BTN as a part of their regular packages.

The same could be said, to a lesser extent, about us.

Also, we win championships, too, and they don't. That always helps.

 

[SubbaBub]

Judging by the interest in attending this years game on the Michigan board, I would say there is some benefit for B1G teams playing at least one game a year in the NYC/HFD/BOS area. Adding us to RU would accomplish that. Of course that means expanding the Rent, but I think that would get done in necessary for admittance.


Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[pj]

By every raw infrastructure metric, UConn is a peewee compared to the B1G universities. We'd be competing with Northwestern for mascot status.

We would certainly compete in basketball. We've got that covered. But could we live up to the $40 million projections being discussed in the BTN contract? Is UConn's footprint big enough to produce a BTN subscription rate that could cover its end of the bargain?

You look at the schools who have the footprint to cover those ends of the bargain, and you'll see who the B1G will add.

Virginia could. UNC could. Georgia Tech probably could, even as a distant second in its own state.

And by BTN network model standards, Rutgers has a great chance of meeting their end. The sports of local state universities are never left out of standard cable packages in their home states, no matter how lousy the team actually plays. That's the real kick in the nuts. Success has no baring on this at all. Rutgers got the invite because New Jersey packs a lot of people into a small space - enough to make the subscriber numbers work.

We're going to be left with the non-state schools, the Syracuse's, the Wake Forest's, etc. Unless we are thrown a bone...we are Huskies afterall.

As long as we deliver Connecticut plus a share of New England and New York, we'll deliver $40 mn and outdo Georgia Tech easily. NE+NY is 34 million people. It is a far greater audience, TV market, and fanbase than any of those other schools can offer.

You are not analyzing this correctly. Schools do not have a value; leagues have a value. The value of Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State getting a regular football game and frequent exposure in other sports in New England and within a few hours of NYC is huge for the B1G.

 

[GopherHawk]

My opinion isn't worth the electricity it cost to send this message, but I think there are a mulitple of ways UCONN gets a B1G invite.

$40 million in value would be the total Tier 1, BTN, Bowl Payout and NCAA payout. If you think about that, it is most likely closer to $30 million in TV value to be revenue neutral Football quality drives Tier 1 and Basketball quality drives Tier 3 which is BTN and Radio. Can UCONN add or help add an additional (corrected because B1G get 49%) 5 million cable subscribers at the $1/month rate. If you can, your addition could be revenue neutral. I believe revenue neutral will be considered long term because a 16 team schedule has benefits over a 14 team schedule.

My prefered plan is UCONN and Mizzu. It balances the East-West. It allow for a conference with no real outliers.
North - Neb, Iowa, Minn & Wisky
Plains - Mizzu, Illinois, Northwestern, MSU
Central - Indiana, Purdue, Mich, tOSU
East - Penn St, Maryland, Rutgers & UCONN

I think long term the investment into stem cell research could be enough of a value to the medical research community in the B1G that is helps push you over the top.

 

[huskymedic]

Wowsa...

Jeff Barker (@sunjeffbarker)
3/15/13, 10:36 PM
Exclusive: Maryland-Big Ten deal included multimillion-dollar travel subsidy from conference. #Terps #B1G

http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74844333/

"The University of Maryland's deal to join the Big Ten includes not only the lucrative annual payouts that all members receive, but also a significant concession obtained by the school — a subsidy worth tens of millions of dollars from the conference to offset athletic teams' anticipated higher travel costs, according to multiple sources.

The subsidy, which Maryland was promised in negotiations with the conference late last year, made an already appealing offer of Big Ten membership even more attractive to the school.

Since financial details of the agreement are kept private — the amount of the subsidy is not publicly available. But the amount is in the range of $20 million to $30 million, according to sources familiar with the deal."

 

[Fairfield 1st]

Wowsa...

Jeff Barker (@sunjeffbarker)
3/15/13, 10:36 PM
Exclusive: Maryland-Big Ten deal included multimillion-dollar travel subsidy from conference. #Terps #B1G

http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74844333/

"The University of Maryland's deal to join the Big Ten includes not only the lucrative annual payouts that all members receive, but also a significant concession obtained by the school — a subsidy worth tens of millions of dollars from the conference to offset athletic teams' anticipated higher travel costs, according to multiple sources.

The subsidy, which Maryland was promised in negotiations with the conference late last year, made an already appealing offer of Big Ten membership even more attractive to the school.

Since financial details of the agreement are kept private — the amount of the subsidy is not publicly available. But the amount is in the range of $20 million to $30 million, according to sources familiar with the deal."

Mcmurphy just confirmed this on twitter

 

[UConn Dan]

Wowsa...

Jeff Barker (@sunjeffbarker)
3/15/13, 10:36 PM
Exclusive: Maryland-Big Ten deal included multimillion-dollar travel subsidy from conference. #Terps #B1G

http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-74844333/

They only reason for the B1G to concede that much loot to the twerps is because they are serious about cracking the UNC nut.

 

[HuskyDogArt]

I know, give those lazy bastards a wheelchair ramp and they take a mile.

Is there a gene that makes certain people steer every conversation into paranoid slippery slope land?

I just read where the ADA wants sports teams in High Schools and college to have disabled people on the team. I'm not trying to say anything crude, but do you think a visually impaired QB should be on a football field?

 

[uchusky32]

I just read where the ADA wants sports teams in High Schools and college to have disabled people on the team. I'm not trying to say anything crude, but do you think a visually impaired QB should be on a football field?

Do you think it will happen? Every time I buy a lottery ticket I think I should win. Does that make it true?

You might want to buy some more guns I heard Obama wants to take them all!

 

[Samoo]

I just read where the ADA wants sports teams in High Schools and college to have disabled people on the team. I'm not trying to say anything crude, but do you think a visually impaired QB should be on a football field?

source?

 

[chiller99]

Lot of silly talk here especially the UNC /Duke rumors.The folks in Raleigh/Durham truly believe they live in basketball mecca and control things like a boss in regards to hoops.I believe the last time Wallace Wade ,Duke football stadium which is a total disaster sold out was the Stones Big Bang Tour. Ive lived here in Carolina awhile and cant even imagine UNC/Duke/NC State being divided for any conference ,,no way no how send it in Jerome.

 

[uchusky32]

Lot of silly talk here especially the UNC /Duke rumors.The folks in Raleigh/Durham truly believe they live in basketball mecca and control things like a boss in regards to hoops.I believe the last time Wallace Wade ,Duke football stadium which is a total disaster sold out was the Stones Big Bang Tour. Ive lived here in Carolina awhile and cant even imagine UNC/Duke/NC State being divided for any conference ,,no way no how send it in Jerome.

Agree lived in Cary 11 years, wife, brother, sister in law all graduate from St. I'm a Uconn grad. Cant see bow in hell they sell that to the triangle. No damn way. Only only ones talking these schools breaking up don't live in the triangle. You won't get reelected if you let NCSt and UNC split (St schools). And yes Duke is private but the power of the triangle and the rivalries are worth more than people realize. Can't think of any other schools who are from the same St and drive the local sports economy.

 

[Exit 4]

Come on Delany, if you let the ACC tourney take MSG in the coming years your efforts to plant bountiful seeds on the Atlantic Coast with Rutty and MD will be in vein unless you take another school to establish critical mass. UNC and UVA may flirt, but they aren't coming home with you. They built the ACC; their region of the country has momentum and they could never accept a league who's office is north of Richmond.

I have an idea, how about taking a flagship state university which has won 3 mens national titles in BB, has built and continues to invest in state of the art athletic facilities and has positive NYC tv ratings? You should take that school now and pair with Kansas or Mizzu.

The ACC isn't going away...and it would be wise to meet them toe to toe in the north east corridor.

 

[Exit 4]

Agree lived in Cary 11 years, wife, brother, sister in law all graduate from St. I'm a Uconn grad. Cant see bow in hell they sell that to the triangle. No damn way. Only only ones talking these schools breaking up don't live in the triangle. You won't get reelected if you let NCSt and UNC split (St schools). And yes Duke is private but the power of the triangle and the rivalries are worth more than people realize. Can't think of any other schools who are from the same St and drive the local sports economy.

I agree with you. MD had financial desperation. UNC and Duke are different. With the current demographic trends, they should be plucking Michigan and Ohio St from the B1G in 20yrs. I am sure that is their view - in private - after a few drinks.

 

[upstater]

I agree with you. MD had financial desperation. UNC and Duke are different. With the current demographic trends, they should be plucking Michigan and Ohio St from the B1G in 20yrs. I am sure that is their view - in private - after a few drinks.

Demographics is a centennial type thing. Over 100 years. Put it this way, the state that lose more pop than any other was New Jersey, and they were just added because of their TV and their high school football. The losses are in the low thousands. The big gains in the southern states are mainly immigrants.

 

[Exit 4]

Demographics is a centennial type thing. Over 100 years. Put it this way, the state that lose more pop than any other was New Jersey, and they were just added because of their TV and their high school football. The losses are in the low thousands. The big gains in the southern states are mainly immigrants.

North Carolina has gone from 5.8MM to 9.7MM since 1980 while CT went from 3.1MM to 3.6MM. So NC grew by 68% and added the entire state of CT over that time period. CT only grew by 16%.

Furthermore, NC has added over 200k people since 2010. So basically NC is at a point where it adds 30 years of CT population growth every 5 years or less.

Btw, the latest Census data isn't pretty for CT. Over the past 2 years only Fairfield County is growing at any substantive rate, the rest of the state is basically flat or losing population.

Lastly, I don't know what to make of your immigrants comment other than it comes off as rather ignorant about demographic trends and perhaps who you think participates in this forum (hint, not all UConn fans where born here).

From the US Census: While the foreign born resided in every state in 2010, over half lived in just four states: California, New York, Texas, and Florida. Over one-fourth of the total foreign-born population lived in California. California, New York, and New Jersey had the highest foreign-born proportions in their total populations. Over 1 in 4 residents of California and over 1 in 5 residents of New York and New Jersey were foreign born.

Per the link, CT has a higher % of foreign born vs NC.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/acs-19.pdf

 

[Adios]

So we're going to the B1G?

 

[upstater]

North Carolina has gone from 5.8MM to 9.7MM since 1980 while CT went from 3.1MM to 3.6MM. So NC grew by 68% and added the entire state of CT over that time period. CT only grew by 16%.

Furthermore, NC has added over 200k people since 2010. So basically NC is at a point where it adds 30 years of CT population growth every 5 years or less.

Btw, the latest Census data isn't pretty for CT. Over the past 2 years only Fairfield County is growing at any substantive rate, the rest of the state is basically flat or losing population.

Lastly, I don't know what to make of your immigrants comment other than it comes off as rather ignorant about demographic trends and perhaps who you think participates in this forum (hint, not all UConn fans where born here).

From the US Census: While the foreign born resided in every state in 2010, over half lived in just four states: California, New York, Texas, and Florida. Over one-fourth of the total foreign-born population lived in California. California, New York, and New Jersey had the highest foreign-born proportions in their total populations. Over 1 in 4 residents of California and over 1 in 5 residents of New York and New Jersey were foreign born.

Per the link, CT has a higher % of foreign born vs NC.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/acs-19.pdf

Holy cow, my comment about immigrants was about the population rise in Southern states. It's a fact, and I have no idea what your comment is about in reference to who posts here. It's totally irrelevant. That made absolutely no sense.

Your quote from the census validates what I wrote. Immigrants are heavy in southern states, which accounts for much of their population explosion. The rest of what you wrote is fun with facts because the northeast and Great Lake region are still the most heavily populated parts of the USA and they will continue to be for a very long time.

 

[Exit 4]

Demographics is a centennial type thing. Over 100 years. Put it this way, the state that lose more pop than any other was New Jersey, and they were just added because of their TV and their high school football. The losses are in the low thousands. The big gains in the southern states are mainly immigrants.

Another stupid point, since 2010, CT has added only 23k people (mostly all in Fairfield County) while NJ has added 60k. Just look at google population data which is sourced from the US Census estimates. NJ has 8.8MM people and despite all the gloom in doom in that state, the facts are it sits at the crossroads of NYC and Philly (#1 and #4 markets) and remains a gateway state to the northeast in general.

Your confusing the intra country migration data with the general population data. NJ and NY have been immigration gateways for 400 years, so its no surprise really that both have high outbound population shifts for immigrants and natives who are established....its really always been that way. And despite all that outbound traffic, NYC and NJ manage to show some growth and that is more than upstate CT and upstate NY can say - who have done little over 20-30 years.

 

[Exit 4]

Holy cow, my comment about immigrants was about the population rise in Southern states. It's a fact, and I have no idea what your comment is about in reference to who posts here. It's totally irrelevant. That made absolutely no sense.

Your quote from the census validates what I wrote. Immigrants are heavy in southern states, which accounts for much of their population explosion. The rest of what you wrote is fun with facts because the northeast and Great Lake region are still the most heavily populated parts of the USA and they will continue to be for a very long time.

You are not very good with numbers. NC adds the entire population of CT over 30 years and you don't see that as significant?

 

[upstater]

Another stupid point, since 2010, CT has added only 23k people (mostly all in Fairfield County) while NJ has added 60k. Just look at google population data which is sourced from the US Census estimates. NJ has 8.8MM people and despite all the gloom in doom in that state, the facts are it sits at the crossroads of NYC and Philly (#1 and #4 markets) and remains a gateway state to the northeast in general.

Your confusing the intra country migration data with the general population data. NJ and NY have been immigration gateways for 400 years, so its no surprise really that both have high outbound population shifts for immigrants and natives who are established....its really always been that way. And despite all that outbound traffic, NYC and NJ manage to show some growth and that is more than upstate CT and upstate NY can say - who have done little over 20-30 years.

You call posts stupid because you like to cherrypick stats and present them as though there is only one timeframe.

No state lost more people than New Jersey last year. I was defending NJ when I wrote that because the loss was minor. My point was that they had nothing to fear. Are you dense or something? How in the world did you take that as being negative on New Jersey? My point was the exact opposite of what you think it was.

 

[upstater]

You are not very good with numbers. NC adds the entire population of CT over 30 years and you don't see that as significant?

No, I don't see it as significant at all. NC is a good state with a special dynamic in the research triangle and banking. Most southern states are not NC. The Big10 has more to worry about regarding football talent than demographics. It lacks in football players, not in people. And the way global warming is going, things will change in 50 years anyway, so all this kvetching over the south is going to be irrelevant--other than the fact they will still have better football players down there. Take the stick out of your arse.

 

[Exit 4]

No, I don't see it as significant at all. NC is a good state with a special dynamic in the research triangle and banking. Most southern states are not NC. The Big10 has more to worry about regarding football talent than demographics. It lacks in football players, not in people. And the way global warming is going, things will change in 50 years anyway, so all this kvetching over the south is going to be irrelevant--other than the fact they will still have better football players down there. Take the stick out of your arse.

I'm done with this. Don't feel like pushing it further. I think economic and population growth of the south is significant - both of which are outpacing the north and you don't. And I'm still mystified that "immigrants" are somehow even pertinent to this conversation, particularly when outside of Tx and Fl, immigration through the rest of the south is below the national average, not above. Immigrants have cable, buy fan gear and send their kids to college. So, not sure why they would even be mentioned.