For anybody who is trying to make good of our sitiation

[Pudge]

Well Whale typically, I read your posts (and I do read them, despite their negativity) and I think man this guy should quit breaking the prozacs in half, but this post is focused and specific, and not just a generic woe is me.

So who is your splashy hire? That's easier to say than to achieve given our current circumstances. I'm not sure we could draw big time established coaches here right now. I wish we had done that after FUCHCRE but things are tough right now. I think we are now in the position where we need to find the up and coming coach and ride his success until he gets a better offer. That's a step back but that's where we are.

I like number 3, and I think the same should be done at the XL and Gampel as well. There was a time when men's and women's basketball was a hot ticket. That enthusiasm was lost due to poor pricing and a preference for a big check over longstanding fans. That was a huge mistake and a new pricing policy could go a long way toward rebuilding the base. I've noticed that UConn seems to have ramped up the marketing a bit with three game plans and better ads. I think that is step in the right direction. I'd like to see us put students opposite the camera around the lower portion of the court. That does cost us revenue in the near term but it enhances the brand in long run. I wonder if we should include a partial ticket offset as a part of the tuition like other schools do. We certainly should make it as easy as possible to get to the XL and the Rent by providing busses. I believe this is happening for football, although I am not sure how well utilized they are. I'm not sure that it happens for basketball.

I'm not sure about the stadium expansion plan. I get the point behind it but I worry about putting it out there when we will have 20k (or perhaps less) at a lot of games next year. Maybe hold this back until we get a new coach and use it to pump up excitement.

Herbst bothers me less than some. I do agree that her "We're winners who like winning" and her "intriguingly unique" (or was it "uniquely intriguing") statements were underwhelming.

I'll add a number 6 that we need to aggressively market the university both in its academics and in its athletics consistently and at a high quality. I sense at step in the right direction, but it needs to ramped up and the quality needs to be improved.

Regarding ESPN, given that there was a public statement by someone who was in the trenches that ESPN was pulling the strings of that particular round (and additional discussion after the original raid) I think it is a tough stance to suggest that they are passive bystanders in CR. While it may not have gone exactly the way they wanted they were the catalyst. Without their ponying up money to the ACC for raid pt1 and pt2, there is a good chance that things are not as volatile right now, and a good chance that the Big East is still a viable major conference. I do believe that UConn got caught in the crossfire of ESPN's effort to make sure that NBC couldn't get a foothold in the cable college sports market. Do they hate UConn, probably not. Do they give a rat's patootie whether they've damaged our college sports, probably not. Should the State ever give them taxpayer money again, probably not.

Honestly ... those are the ACTION items that need to get done. Warde Manual????

 

[Pudge]

I am amazed at about 10 posters that just hammer the same theme no matter what they thread. (or what the topics or meanderings of the thread).

I agree with the idea that we know what we are going to read from some posters before we begin the first sentence.

 

[CL82]

ESPN had the ACC locked down for a decade at a well below market rate. Why would ESPN try and increase the amount they owed? Why would they jack up their own deal? By doing so they hoped to to take a potential competitor out of market before it became established enough to be a serious threat. Invest a little now so that you don't have pay more for every TV contract down the road. For Syracuse and Pitt, neither of whom move the ratings needle? How does that make any sense? Keep in mind that the original targets were Syracuse and UConn, the two best basketball teams, effectively finishing off the Big East. Why would they try and owe more money when they had a sweetheart deal? See my answer above. Keep in mind the cost was partially offset by the money that no longer needed to expend to keep the Big East.

An automatic clause was triggered, one that exists in every conference TV deal, including the Mountain West's one with CBS. The ACC wanted to increase their payday, the only way they could do it was by expansion. Period. That's it. That's all it is. Of course we still have the statement of someone with first hand knowledge who states that ESPN "told them who to get". Kind of an inconvenient fact for your "we had nothing to do with it" argument.

This is checkers. Not chess. It's neither. It is business. ESPN eliminated a potential competitor. We are just collateral damage. I wonder if anyone will explore the anti-trust implications, not regarding college sports per se but regarding one company's anti-competitive practices while holding the vast majority of college sports broadcast rights.

 

[freescooter]

I am AMAZED at about 10 posters that just HAMMER the same theme NO matter what they thread. (or what the topics or meanderings of the thread).

I agree with the idea that we KNOW what we are going to read from some posters before WE BEGIN the first sentence.

Fixed your post. I think your CAP key mustn't be working...

 

[whaler11]

As for being a conspiracy theorist, multiple data points on the same trend line shows causation. UConn did not get to where it is by accident, and ESPN was responsible. Despite better ratings, a better market and a better program, programs like Pitt, Syracuse and Louisville were saved before UConn, and ESPN could have gotten us in the queue at any point but chose not to. Those 3 schools also did not give ESPN over $100MM in tax breaks.

Connecticut paid ESPN $100 million to save Pitt, Syracuse and Louisville. That is not a conspiracy, that is a fact.

So why don't you start with a motive?

And make sure to include why to bury UConn, they decided to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on mildly interesting programming.

Why did they do it?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

So why don't you start with a motive?

And make sure to include why to bury UConn, they decided to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on mildly interesting programming.

Why did they do it?

I don't need to have a motive. If someone is standing over a dead body with a bloody knife, it is a good starting assumption that person committed murder.

 

[RMoore1999]

LOGIC!
REASON!




...WIIIIIIITCH!

I look forward to the point at which you give up on UConn completely, jump on a bandwagon (surprised you aren't an Alabama fan for football and Duke fan for basketball), and stop posting here.

I actually thought This thread contains some of whaler's least negative comments. Correctly commenting upon a distressing plight doesnt make him negative. his 5-step plan would be a great start.

 

[whaler11]

I don't need to have a motive. If someone is standing over a dead body with a bloody knife, it is a good starting assumption that person committed murder.

This proves your insanity. Why would a corporation spend 9 figures damaging an athletic program for no reason.

In a methodical way in which they have kept all the parties silent? Jesus the fake moon landing makes more sense.

 

[CL82]

This proves your insanity. Why would a corporation spend 9 figures damaging an athletic program for no reason.

Don't know but what corporation wouldn't eliminate a competitor with a relatively minor investment, if it meant not not having to pay higher prices for product in the foreseeable future? UConn wasn't the target, it was just collateral damage.

 

[whaler11]

Don't know but what corporation wouldn't eliminate a competitor with a relatively minor investment, if it meant not not having to pay higher prices for product in the foreseeable future? UConn wasn't the target, it was just collateral damage.

Well even if that were true - that isn't what Waylon is saying. He is saying it was intentional damage.

 

[Vowelguy]

DO NOT READ IF YOU REALLY DON'T CARE FOR NEGITIVITY. Thank you.

Or an inability to spell correctly.

 

[Huskieforlife]

Or an inability to spell correctly.

Sue me.....

 

[CL82]

Well even if that were true - that isn't what Waylon is saying. He is saying it was intentional damage.

I don't know there is whole lot of why would they pick on UConn being thrown around this thread as a defense of EPSN. It is red herring.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

This proves your insanity. Why would a corporation spend 9 figures damaging an athletic program for no reason.

In a methodical way in which they have kept all the parties silent? Jesus the fake moon landing makes more sense.

ESPN chose who got on a lifeboat. They made a lot of choices and never got to UConn.

 

[whaler11]

ESPN chose who got on a lifeboat. They made a lot of choices and never got to UConn.

Have you gotten to a reason as to what their motivation was yet? I'm all ears. Did ESPN save Louisville last go round? Did ESPN save Rutgers and West Virginia too? Does ESPN also have an vendetta against Cincinnati and USF - or are they just unlucky and UConn is the target.

 

[baggerbob]

The C7 were the problem that ESPN wanted to kill, Georgetown, Marquette, Villanova were the only decent teams out of the present re-incarnation. UConn, Louisville, West Virginia, Syracuse, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Notre Dame were by far better in basketball , and ESPN was paying for football and basketball, and felt the 7 would have been better off alone. Then the basketball schools helped vote down the contract, and ESPN figured it was time to deep 6 the conference.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Have you gotten to a reason as to what their motivation was yet? I'm all ears. Did ESPN save Louisville last go round? Did ESPN save Rutgers and West Virginia too? Does ESPN also have an vendetta against Cincinnati and USF - or are they just unlucky and UConn is the target.

I'm normally on the same page with you Whaler on the vast majority on topics on the Boneyard. However, I think ESPN definitely played a larger role in realignment, at least initially.

It makes sense to me that the ACC/ESPN acted together on the Syracuse/Pitt raid. The ACC gets to re-do their (under market) contract and while ESPN would have to open the checkbook for the ACC, it hurt the Big East brand from the perspective of a competitor (NBC Sports) to really make a big splash on the market. I think this is at least a reasonable premise.

I also believe that the targets were Syracuse and UConn and due to BC's opposition and a comparable brand in Pitt, there wasn't much push back from ESPN or the ACC. There's no conspiracy against UConn - we really got screwed due to BC's opposition and then Florida State yielding all the leverage in taking Louisville.

I think this was the initial plan. However, everything that has occurred since has spiraled out of control and cost ESPN a ton of extra money. This obviously wasn't the intention and who knows whether or not they occur without the Pitt/Syracuse raid, or take it a step further, the BC/VPI/Miami raid.

A final point, I don't know much about law, but as others have mentioned, tortious interference seems to describe the dynamic between ESPN and the ACC/Big East with respect to the raids. Unfortunately for us, UConn seems to be an innocent bystander that was irrevocably harmed in raids (unless we ourselves get to go to the ACC should further raids occur).

In any event, that's my $.02

 

[whaler11]

I'm normally on the same page with you Whaler on the vast majority on topics on the Boneyard. However, I think ESPN definitely played a larger role in realignment, at least initially.

It makes sense to me that the ACC/ESPN acted together on the Syracuse/Pitt raid. The ACC gets to re-do their (under market) contract and while ESPN would have to open the checkbook for the ACC, it hurt the Big East brand from the perspective of a competitor (NBC Sports) to really make a big splash on the market. I think this is at least a reasonable premise.

I also believe that the targets were Syracuse and UConn and due to BC's opposition and a comparable brand in Pitt, there wasn't much push back from ESPN or the ACC. There's no conspiracy against UConn - we really got screwed due to BC's opposition and then Florida State yielding all the leverage in taking Louisville.

I think this was the initial plan. However, everything that has occurred since has spiraled out of control and cost ESPN a ton of extra money. This obviously wasn't the intention and who knows whether or not they occur without the Pitt/Syracuse raid, or take it a step further, the BC/VPI/Miami raid.

A final point, I don't know much about law, but as others have mentioned, tortious interference seems to describe the dynamic between ESPN and the ACC/Big East with respect to the raids. Unfortunately for us, UConn seems to be an innocent bystander that was irrevocably harmed in raids (unless we ourselves get to go to the ACC should further raids occur).

In any event, that's my $.02

So if this is true ESPN didn't intentionally destroy UConn - BC was allowed to and ESPN couldn't stop them. Nobody is saying that they don't influence. Waylon is saying they murdered UConn and are the 'evidence' is clear. .

 

[ConnHuskBask]

So if this is true ESPN didn't intentionally destroy UConn - BC was allowed to and ESPN couldn't stop them. Nobody is saying that they don't influence. Waylon is saying they murdered UConn and are the 'evidence' is clear. .

Agreed. There's no incentive at all for ESPN to intentionally screw UCONN.

I really do fully believe ESPN started this whole mess and all things being equal, they miscalculated the situation and ended up paying more for actually leas product.

I know thats a bold stance considering ESPN's business acumen, but I don't think anyone could have for saw a day where Rutgers was a B1G school and the ACC academics yielded to the demands of Florida State.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

So if this is true ESPN didn't intentionally destroy UConn - BC was allowed to and ESPN couldn't stop them. Nobody is saying that they don't influence. Waylon is saying they murdered UConn and are the 'evidence' is clear. .

Whaler, you never just drop an argument when you are wrong. I have been crystal clear about my position here, and the evidence supports me 100%.

1) ESPN started a process that they knew would devastate the Big East and leave several of the programs in smoldering ruins. Is anyone debating this point?

2) ESPN got to choose which programs got saved and which ones got killed, and they chose TCU, WVU, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers, and didn't choose USF, UConn and Cincinnati. Is anyone debating this point?

Why are you arguing? The fact that the process got out of control and overall, 14 of the 17 programs ended up in pretty good shape does not change the fact that ESPN started a process that was going to irrevocably damage several university athletic programs, and they had a pretty good idea going in which ones they were going to be. The only thing ESPN did not expect was that Fox would be so aggressive, grabbing Rutgers and Maryland (which caused Louisville to jump), and the C7.

 

[noeynox]

Whaler, you never just drop an argument when you are wrong. I have been crystal clear about my position here, and the evidence supports me 100%.

1) ESPN started a process that they knew would devastate the Big East and leave several of the programs in smoldering ruins. Is anyone debating this point?

2) ESPN got to choose which programs got saved and which ones got killed, and they chose TCU, WVU, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers, and didn't choose USF, UConn and Cincinnati. Is anyone debating this point?

Why are you arguing? The fact that the process got out of control and overall, 14 of the 17 programs ended up in pretty good shape does not change the fact that ESPN started a process that was going to irrevocably damage several university athletic programs, and they had a pretty good idea going in which ones they were going to be. The only thing ESPN did not expect was that Fox would be so aggressive, grabbing Rutgers and Maryland (which caused Louisville to jump), and the C7.

This pretty much summarizes how this all went down. Conspiracy theory or not, we are the one school that has had both their basketball and football product take a serious hit due to conference realignment. Part of me feels UConn should be able to sue, but we saw how that worked out the first time.

 

[Pudge]

I typed that the landscape would change dramatically over the next 20 years (here) ... and got slammed.

But, look at the last 12 years of the Federal Presidential election as a guide (use Nate Silver) of dramatic demographic change in a major US function & you see some of the elements: you cannot take out Universities like University of Central Florida & University of South Florida (50,000 enrollment each); US - UConn (at a State Flagship which did not play competitive high football in 1998); Boise; the Nevada Universities; a growth spurt school like San Diego State (who is now clearly the best hoop Program in California); major market Texas schools ... and still keep the clubby Wake Forest's, Washington State's, Texas Tech's, etc. The money is skewing thought; (up to $40m per school is proposed for B1G versus low 7 digit for MWC) but, there are huge holes ... because ... there are outlets (Fox, CBS, NBC) that are willing to pay a good dollar.

This 4 team Playoff will inevitably 8 with 6 years. And that opens the exposure for far more opportunity beyond the top 4 conferences. SEC may win forever; but, a good 100 Universities will be moving forward.

 

[noeynox]

Pudge, I hope your right, the problem is there seems to be a closing of the ranks. You have administrators on record saying they don't want to share their money. This is ugly.

 

[zls44]

I'd love to see a four team playoff expand to eight, but the contract for four is locked in through, I think, 2025.

It'll take something like the Big Ten or Pac 12 failing to get a second team in for like five or six years in a row before there's even a hint of a chance at expanding it. They all like four because they all assume they'll each get two teams in it every year.

Obviously, they're wrong.

But egos win the day.

 

[whaler11]

Whaler, you never just drop an argument when you are wrong. I have been crystal clear about my position here, and the evidence supports me 100%.

1) ESPN started a process that they knew would devastate the Big East and leave several of the programs in smoldering ruins. Is anyone debating this point?

2) ESPN got to choose which programs got saved and which ones got killed, and they chose TCU, WVU, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse and Rutgers, and didn't choose USF, UConn and Cincinnati. Is anyone debating this point?

Why are you arguing? The fact that the process got out of control and overall, 14 of the 17 programs ended up in pretty good shape does not change the fact that ESPN started a process that was going to irrevocably damage several university athletic programs, and they had a pretty good idea going in which ones they were going to be. The only thing ESPN did not expect was that Fox would be so aggressive, grabbing Rutgers and Maryland (which caused Louisville to jump), and the C7.

To #1 when did they start the process? With the addition of Syracuse and Pitt? Well since that was Syracuse and UConn prior to BC's input doesn't that mean BC is the murderer and not ESPN?

ESPN chose Rutgers? Not the Big 10? ESPN chose TCU and WVU not the Big 12? In the last round you think ESPN chose Louisville - not FSU? Really - you think they made those calls?

 

[RMoore1999]

I'd love to see a four team playoff expand to eight, but the contract for four is locked in through, I think, 2025.

It'll take something like the Big Ten or Pac 12 failing to get a second team in for like five or six years in a row before there's even a hint of a chance at expanding it. They all like four because they all assume they'll each get two teams in it every year.

Obviously, they're wrong.

But egos win the day.

Virtually every contract is renegotiable. No way Delaney thinks B1G will be getting 2 teams in playoff in near future; but he knows SEC likely will, paving way for 2nd B1G school in big bowl games (think orange).