Crunch time for Herbst/Manuel

[upstater]

Since you can't bother to read earlier posts, I can't but -
Also, the people making these decisions have the TV numbers for both FB and BB. They know who draws the biggest collective set of eyes and the resulting TV contract $$$. People can post all day long about the numbers that Uconn can bring from outside of CT but there has to be some evidence that Uconn (and RU) do not deliver NYC to any large degree. I do not have any facts to support that conclusion, but is seems pretty apparent based on who has moved and who has not.

I read all earlier posts.

You think it's apparent that Swofford made these decisions based on the eyeballs that Pitt and Syracuse draw over UConn and Rutgers. That's a highly questionable assumption. This is the same guy who thought rodeo didn't stand a chance against a New England ACC football team.

 

[Carl Spackler]

No. The crunch time is for our Governor. He was blindsided, following his helping ESPN to corporate welfare from the Connecticut taxpayers, when ESPN cooperated with the ACC to take Syracuse and Pitt and not us. So be it. But if his discussions thereafter did not make sure ESPN wouldn't help another conference doing this again without making sure UConn was taken care of, he is an incompetent buffoon and deserves no ones support.

We will know shortly. Either UConn needs to be taken care of or ESPN needs to get not a dime of taxpayer money.

As a small business owner who has never asked for it, I am not a big fan of corporate welfare generally. When the state pays it, and I acknowledge there are reasons to pay it, I expect it to only go to a business that isn't feeling free to screwing the state in other ways while they take our money and produce jobs.

If those terms aren't acceptable, then yes, f@@@ing go elsewhere with your jobs and let some other state be the sucker that pays you.

I don't know if we're on the same side of the socio-economic-political fence on most things BL - but I stand with you on this. I'm a proud resident of CT, and a small business owner and I just cut my state tax check today, which reflects approx a 100% increase in what I paid not too long ago, except nothing in my own business has really changed.

Malloy, or whomever is pulling his puppet strings, better get this thing right.

 

[businesslawyer]

I don't know if we're on the same side of the socio-economic-political fence on most things BL - but I stand with you on this. I'm a proud resident of CT, and a small business owner and I just cut my state tax check today, which reflects approx a 100% increase in what I paid not too long ago, except nothing in my own business has really changed.

Malloy, or whomever is pulling his puppet strings, better get this thing right.

To be clear, I am not saying business owners generally owe the State a duty. If I want to take on a case against the State of Connecticut, that is my right. And if ESPN felt free screwing UConn, that is its right. But when you take money from the state, you are implicitly agreeing to be in a fiduciary relationship with it, and then you just can't say I can do whatever I want.

At least, that's my view. But I have been a strong supporter of this Administration and I now want to see something.

 

[RuffRuff]

Did this in real life - such a bad move.

 

[RuffRuff]

Some months ago I repeated comments that came from a person in the SEC office who plays in the same golf dog fight as I do. For what it is worth (maybe nothing) I will summarize again them here. UConn is like a hot girl who is high maintenance. She is great to date but getting married requires a lot more thought. Source of the high maintenance opinion: Reaction to the initial BE split, conflicts between the two strongest personalities in the athletic department.

Did this in real life - such a bad move.

 

[observer]

Since you can't bother to read earlier posts, I can't but -
Also, the people making these decisions have the TV numbers for both FB and BB. They know who draws the biggest collective set of eyes and the resulting TV contract $$$. People can post all day long about the numbers that Uconn can bring from outside of CT but there has to be some evidence that Uconn (and RU) do not deliver NYC to any large degree. I do not have any facts to support that conclusion, but is seems pretty apparent based on who has moved and who has not.

The ACC as a selector conference has clearly selected the best available teams. Swofford did not just draw school names out of a hat or throw darts at a map. The expansion by the ACC was a calculated and deliberate business decision made after all of the numbers were crunched. Syracuse was not added because the ACC wanted another team that wears orange to pair with Clemson but because of the value they and the other expansion schools added. Maybe BC had an agenda against UConn but if UConn had the numbers as far as value BC's objection would have been noted and duly ignored.

 

[uc1974]

Regardless of the UConn conference situation, ESPN and what happens with everything, Malloy is an incompetent buffoon. The office of governor of CT does not attract great intellectual talent except in rare cases. It doesn't pay much and you have to deal with the real intellectual lowlifes in the legislature. Would any one of us want the job? This is from a Democrat and from someone who was appointed to his last position by one of them. Although I was competent for the position I got it because of who I knew, not because I was necessarily the best. Expect nothing from Malloy and be super surprised (and pleased) if I turn out to be wrong.

 

[Carl Spackler]

To be clear, I am not saying business owners generally owe the State a duty. If I want to take on a case against the State of Connecticut, that is my right. And if ESPN felt free screwing UConn, that is its right. But when you take money from the state, you are implicitly agreeing to be in a fiduciary relationship with it, and then you just can't say I can do whatever I want.

At least, that's my view. But I have been a strong supporter of this Administration and I now want to see something.

I'm not a lawyer, and that looks like lawyer speak. I know that if I don't pay my state taxes, I'm in trouble with the state, and since Mr. Malloy's been in office, I've got lots more money that the State says I owe for taxes.

My CT 1040-ES check went out in the mail today. I too, want to see some action on the Governor's part in all of this. MAJOR action.

 

[CL82]

No. The crunch time is for our Governor. He was blindsided, following his helping ESPN to corporate welfare from the Connecticut taxpayers, when ESPN cooperated with the ACC to take Syracuse and Pitt and not us. So be it. But if his discussions thereafter did not make sure ESPN wouldn't help another conference doing this again without making sure UConn was taken care of, he is an incompetent buffoon and deserves no ones support.

We will know shortly. Either UConn needs to be taken care of or ESPN needs to get not a dime of taxpayer money.

I like the sentiment but I am pretty sure that this wasn't a contingency built into the original deal. Now, as to any new deal, the State should absolutely hold ESPN accountable. Until then, if Malloy even gets a meeting, it is only as a courtesy.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Regardless of the UConn conference situation, ESPN and what happens with everything, Malloy is an incompetent buffoon. The office of governor of CT does not attract great intellectual talent except in rare cases. It doesn't pay much and you have to deal with the real intellectual lowlifes in the legislature. Would any one of us want the job? This is from a Democrat and from someone who was appointed to his last position by one of them. Although I was competent for the position I got it because of who I knew, not because I was necessarily the best. Expect nothing from Malloy and be super surprised (and pleased) if I turn out to be wrong.

Unfortunately I agree. THe one guy in recent times that was not of the mold, had the lowlifes dig up the littlest piece of dirt they could find, and turned it into a prison sentence.

 

[businesslawyer]

I like the sentiment but I am pretty sure that this wasn't a contingency built into the original deal. Now, as to any new deal, the State should absolutely hold ESPN accountable. Until then, if Malloy even gets a meeting, it is only as a courtesy.

I can't disagree more strongly. When two parties enter into a deal, each expect the other not to screw them. whether the contract says that or not.

 

[Carl Spackler]

LINDA!!!

LINDA MCMAHON TO THE RESCUE!!

WWF, have somebody climb the ropes and drop a flying elbow down on ESPN from washington.

 

[06029]

I can't disagree more strongly. When two parties enter into a deal, each expect the other not to screw them. whether the contract says that or not.

Unfortunately, ESPN is not screwing the state. They are keeping and adding jobs in the state. Their business dealings with the BE really has nothing to do with the tax incentives they received. They are 2 distinct things. The impact that any of the conference moves/income has on Uconn as a fiscal consideration is much smaller than the fiscal impact of ESPN keeping and adding jobs.

And yes, the state of CT is giving away way too many of these things for my liking and are giving to them to businesses that really do not deserve them.

 

[businesslawyer]

Unfortunately, ESPN is not screwing the state. They are keeping and adding jobs in the state. Their business dealings with the BE really has nothing to do with the tax incentives they received. They are 2 distinct things. The impact that any of the conference moves/income has on Uconn as a fiscal consideration is much smaller than the fiscal impact of ESPN keeping and adding jobs.

And yes, the state of CT is giving away way too many of these things for my liking and are giving to them to businesses that really do not deserve them.

I hear your point. I still disagree. If I take $5M to expand into Hartford and add thirty new lawyers and thirty or forty other jobs, I don't go ahead and take a case to sue the State of Connecticut. I don't care that the contract doesn't flat out forbid me -- if you take money from someone you owe them something more than taking it and hiring people.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I hear your point. I still disagree. If I take $5M to expand into Hartford and add thirty new lawyers and thirty or forty other jobs, I don't go ahead and take a case to sue the State of Connecticut. I don't care that the contract doesn't flat out forbid me -- if you take money from someone you owe them something more than taking it and hiring people.

Good lord. Did I just read a liberal mind state that people should be accountable for their actions and respectful of each other when materials, goods or currency exchange hands - even if it's not specified on a piece of paper somwhere?

If only more bleeding hearts would be able to cross over from bleeding out all over the place to actually fighting for the things they work hard for to provide for their familes, and things they value, and actually expect that people are to be held accountable for their own behavior? Things might be different in this state. LOL!!

 

[CL82]

I can't disagree more strongly. When two parties enter into a deal, each expect the other not to screw them. whether the contract says that or not.

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this counselor. The act of entering a contract in one area doesn't create a fiduciary duty in every other area.

The University of Connecticut isn't a party to the contract and ESPN isn't going to step out from behind the curtain and say yeah we've been behind all this. Conference realignment is too far from the subject matter of the contract.

Connecticut paid an incentive for ESPN to stay put and meet certain employment targets. That's what we (and by that I mean you) paid for as citizens of the State and that's exactly what we'll get. No more; no less.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this counselor. The act of entering a contract in one area doesn't create a fiduciary duty in every other area.

The University of Connecticut isn't a party to the contract and ESPN isn't going to step out from behind the curtain and say yeah we've been behind all this. Conference realignment is too far from the subject matter of the contract.

Connecticut paid an incentive for ESPN to stay put and meet certain employment targets. That's what we (and by that I mean you) paid for as citizens of the State and that's exactly what we'll get. No more; no less.

Now that's a liberal mindset. YOu think that Virginia Tech was a mutual party involved with a contract between the university, the state governor of Virginia representing the State of Virgina and any contract with teh ACC or Big East in 2003?

That governor stepped in, and got something done. It's not the only example of a politician, getting a job done for a state institution in a situation that involves the welfare of a state associated university, in these 50 states of the union.

 

[huskymedic]

I hear your point. I still disagree. If I take $5M to expand into Hartford and add thirty new lawyers and thirty or forty other jobs, I don't go ahead and take a case to sue the State of Connecticut. I don't care that the contract doesn't flat out forbid me -- if you take money from someone you owe them something more than taking it and hiring people.

A lawyer with a conscience? Sorry - couldn't resist.

 

[Mr. Hand]

ESPN absolutely should be held to the standard of a partner - when it accepts special compensation from the state like it did.

They are certainly not holding up their end.

If I were a politico, I'd have a new favorite target to play hardball with from now on.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Why not Big East for football? Yes, I realize this is hypothetical speculation. But if the ACC wanted UConn sports sans football, why not keep football in tge Big East? I know thet Big East would be pissed, but beggars can't be choosers. They need UConn to help keep them relevant (as a flagship state school)

This is the first real "outside the box" suggestion I've seen.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on this counselor. The act of entering a contract in one area doesn't create a fiduciary duty in every other area.

The University of Connecticut isn't a party to the contract and ESPN isn't going to step out from behind the curtain and say yeah we've been behind all this. Conference realignment is too far from the subject matter of the contract.

Connecticut paid an incentive for ESPN to stay put and meet certain employment targets. That's what we (and by that I mean you) paid for as citizens of the State and that's exactly what we'll get. No more; no less.

Who cares? Where the hell is there any indication that ESPN, which does not freaking have a contract with Notre Dame, is involved in this? The mere fact that ESPN may view the ACC rights as more valuable does not even remotely suggest that they directed this to happen. NBC still has the home football games. The ACC made a good move for themselves here. Notre Dame did too. Looking for any other cause is silly.

The Big East got ND b/c it was the only conference that would go along with the split. As soon as any more desireable conference was willing to make the same deal, the BE was likely to lose ND. This shouldn't surprise anyone. Hell we've been speculating about it for a year!

If you want someone to blame, blame the Big East. By bringing in just enough cast-offs to keep the conference afloat, ND's hand wasn't forced. They could stand pat. Once that was true, they weren't joining a conference for football, and the ACC, who needed them the most, was willing to cave. If we had let the BE dissolve, ND would be scrambling and would have much less leverage. They might have joined a league for fb, and UConn would probably be better off. Cincy wouldn't be, but who cares.

 

[CL82]

Now that's a liberal mindset. YOu think that Virginia Tech was a mutual party involved with a contract between the university, the state governor of Virginia representing the State of Virgina and any contract with teh ACC or Big East in 2003?

That governor stepped in, and got something done. It's not the only example of a politician, getting a job done for a state institution in a situation that involves the welfare of a state associated university, in these 50 states of the union.

Hardly. A liberal mindset is "I don't like this outcome, it's not fair, so I'll wish for a change regardless of what the law actually is. In the law wishing don't make it so...and that's a good thing. So it really doesn't matter how much you wish "the govenor would step in and get something done" unless there is a legal basis for it, it's not going to happen.

Most of us lose that "magic thinking" around time we enter first grade. For some, apparently, it lingers on.

 

[CL82]

ESPN absolutely should be held to the standard of a partner - when it accepts special compensation from the state like it did.

They are certainly not holding up their end.

If I were a politico, I'd have a new favorite target to play hardball with from now on.

See now this I can agree with. Prospectively, I wouldn't give them jack shit.

 

[ruskin]

What a day for Dr. Herbst & Mr. Manuel, eh? Seriously wishing them all the best as they multitask and try to pull a few rabbits out of a hat.

About ESPN: it's time for all the coy nonsense coming from Bristol to stop. They have to stop acting like they're innocent bystanders in all this conference shifting that's killing the I-A school closest to their HQ. (See DiFilippo, Gene, "ESPN told us what to do"). When the Calhoun dust settles, some SERIOUS high level talks need to take place involving ESPN & Disney honchos and Malloy, Blumenthal, state congressmen and legislators with the goal of finding UConn a stable conference home. Not asking for a handout, like ESPN did from state, just a hand.

 

[Waquoit]

It's over, Johnny. It's over!

 

[Rumrunner]

For those too naive to believe it, ND had been talking with the ACC for months, even asking their tv partners what the financial ramifications would be. This isn't my opinion, it was admited to at the press conference. By the way, the ACC should see about a $1m bump per team, ND says and that ND gets 20% of 1/15th of the ACC's media contract with ESPN, which ND is calling revenue neutral.

So ESPN was involved.

 

[UCFBfan]

If ESPN is so involved, and I truly believe they are, why don't the other major networks do something about? Why isn't CBSSports saying anything or crying foul? Why isn't NBC up in arms, especially now that their cash cow is probably gone in 2015? Why doesn't Fox say anything? I just don't understand. It's fine and all for the little bloggers and smaller sites to say something but why aren't the big boys doing something about this? All this shuffling will be affecting them (maybe not Fox). CBS is bound to possibly lose the SEC altogether and NBC is likely to lose ND. I'm very perplexed.....

 

[pj]

If ESPN is so involved, and I truly believe they are, why don't the other major networks do something about? Why isn't CBSSports saying anything or crying foul? Why isn't NBC up in arms, especially now that their cash cow is probably gone in 2015? Why doesn't Fox say anything? I just don't understand. It's fine and all for the little bloggers and smaller sites to say something but why aren't the big boys doing something about this? All this shuffling will be affecting them (maybe not Fox). CBS is bound to possibly lose the SEC altogether and NBC is likely to lose ND. I'm very perplexed.....

It's a bidding war, cash talks, and ESPN has the $5/channel subscription fees. The other networks have 1/10 their voice.