Interview With Gerry DiNardo

[CL82]

You say at worst, UCONN is as popular in NY as Rutgers. Yet you have nothing to back that up. Have you been asked by the Yankees to play a regular season game at Yankee Stadium? Has the Empire State Building been lit up for you after a big win?

If you have family in North Jersey, then you know your football gets NO local news coverage...unless it happens to be in a week they are playing Rutgers.

And lots of kids DON't go to UCONN. a few do each year...but that's it. Just a handful each year. That is not LOTS. NJ probably sends 20 times more kids to Pennsylvania, which is the number one destination ste for outgoing NJ students(Penn State, Pitt, Villanova, Lehigh, Lafayette, West Chester, etc all have significant NJ alumni bases) then it does to Connecticut. Maybe even more than 20 times.

Rutgers ALWAYS leads college football coverage on the local NYC channels. ALWAYS. If Syracuse plays in a big game, they're usually next...followed by the local teams like Army and Columbia. UCONN football is simply not covered.

If you had fans in NY than you would be able to move the meter when UCONN plays in ESPN, yet you don't. Not even one bit. RU not only has great ratings when it plays on SNY...and has tons of programming, like pre-game and post game shows...etc....but we have also played in 9 out of the 10 top rated football games on ESPN and ESPN 2 in the NYC DMA.

UCONN has appeared in ZERO of the top 10 games in the NYC DMA.

In NJ, you have a few kids go to UCONN. SO what? The state of Connecticut is like the number 3 feeder state to Rutgers (after NY and PA) for students....but that doesn't mean that the state of Connecticut cares a lick about Rutgers, despite being home to a Rutgers alumni base. It doesn't. Likewise, the State of NJ doesn't care a lick about UCONN either, despite there being a tiny UCONN alumni base in the state.

To say NJ cares about Connecticut because UCONN appears on SNY which airs in NJ is laughably weak.
I guess the state of Connectict cares about Rutgers than...since you're also watching Rutgers on SNY.

Just flawed logic.

A few quick points:

1. The UConn woman's team has better SNY coverage than any Rutgers team, men or women. Think about that before you go puffing your chest out in this neighborhood about your SNY coverage.

2. It is extraordinarily easy to find UConn flags and gear in North Jersey. I see them pretty much every weekend. You rarely see Rutgers flags flying in NJ. You'd never see one in CT and there Husky gear and flags are ubiquitous there.

3. I am often at AUU basketball in NJ tournaments. There are always one or more teams named the Huskies. I've yet to see one named the Knights.

4. I was at the RU/UConn game last night. Connecticut colors were pretty prominent at this game at the RAC.

5. You have not had relevant Men's basketball team since, when, the bicentennial?

The depth of fans and loyalty isn't even close. What NJ does have going for it is that it is incredibly densely populated. While that does make the quality of life pretty crappy in places like Middlesex/Essex counties, it makes for very good ratings because even middling viewership over such a teaming mass of humanity means eyeballs on the screen. The fact that that NJ does not have its own DMA (and really the Newark DMA, who'd care? Trenton? Yawn. Paterson and or Camden? lol) and instead is ignored as a state and divvied up between NY and Philly means that RU will seem to "draw in these cities' DMA even though they are just bringing a tiny portion of the NJ population and then only during good years.

That said, you guys got the golden ticket. Your B1G membership will, I believe, drive your athletic programs and your university as whole to new heights. You really ought to be pleased about that. So get over your inferiority complex and stop haunting other boards, waiting for validation that you won't get. In the end you are still just Rutgers, at least for the time being.

 

[Vuce]

I am still waiting for buggsy to tell us which sports rutgers is really really good at .

 

[RegisteredUconn]

A few quick points:

1. The UConn woman's team has better SNY coverage than any Rutgers team, men or women. Think about that before you go puffing your chest out in this neighborhood about your SNY coverage.

A few years ago Rutgers banned ticket sales to women's games at the RAC to UConn fans so they wouldn't be embarrassed on their home court. Can't remember the details...Nan probably does.

Full disclosure: I'm a Rutgers alum so I have no interest in trashing them. Also a Maryland alum so I need UConn in the B1G for the trifecta.

 

[uconndogs]

This kind of post from a visitor feels like someone coming over to rub salt in a raw wound. Real small man stuff. The kid in the school yard who only picks a fight against another kid whose already down.

And I know it has nothing to do with CR, but for god sake Rutgers, win something.....anything....I don't care what it is.....try javeline catching for all I care. But, christ......talk about an athletic program with absolutely no success at anything and a fan base that is appearantly oblivious to that very telling fact.

You know what Bugs......FO!

 

[whaler11]

Thanks to Frank for being more patient about UNC and a la carte cable than I am.

The idea that the Big 10 wouldn't salivate over Carolina is impossible to comprehend. They are the perfect school for the Big 10 after Notre Dame.

 

[whaler11]

They have major issues with their football brand. The center of gravity in college football has shifted to the south and the west. That's why they need to expand southward and not into an area where people don't particularly care for college football.

They don't have a brand issue. They have a talent issue.

 

[ZooCougar]

They don't have a brand issue. They have a talent issue.

Yes, and that's because of the brand issue.

 

[Fishy]

Full disclosure: I'm a Rutgers alum so I have no interest in trashing them. Also a Maryland alum so I need UConn in the B1G for the trifecta.

I don't know what to say.

I think that maybe we need to throw you in a volcano or something. It's too perfect.

It just seems that God has sent you to us for a reason and that reason might involve a volcano and some sort of sacrifice. Maybe you're here to help us get rid of this bad juju?

Rest assured, if this works, we will remember you and speak of you often.

(If it doesn't, if we ever mention you, it'll tell people that we have no idea why you jumped into the volcano.)

 

[whaler11]

Yes, and that's because of the brand issue.

I think it's a demographic issue. The players in the upper midwest just aren't as good or as plentiful as the South. So an Ohio State or a Michigan can take all the players and compete but it leaves the rest of the league barren.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

While I think Frank overweights the importance of a Florida State, he's spot-on with most everything else.

I can appreciate that our current situation sucks so freaking hard that some confirmation bias is good to keep us off the ledge, but the Big Ten is heading south, not north.

I wish that were not the case and if the Big Ten every really expanded past 18 or so, or if they truly cannot split teams off of the ACC, maybe there's a light. But there's nothing now.

I stand by my assertion that the Big 10 will add UConn, Syracuse and/or Boston College before it would add GTech or FSU. With the SEC Network rolling out, the Big 10 has no chance to compete for Cable real estate in the South. No state with an SEC school will pay anywhere near full carriage for the BTN. Yes, the southern markets are growing, but there is already an 800 pound gorilla there that doesn't play nice with others. The competition for cable real estate in the south is already over, and the SEC Network hasn't even started up yet.

If Georgia was playing Kentucky in football, and a ranked GTech was playing a ranked Ohio State, Georgia/Kentucky would double up GTech/tOSU in ratings in the state of Georgia.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I think it's a demographic issue. The players in the upper midwest just aren't as good or as plentiful as the South. So an Ohio State or a Michigan can take all the players and compete but it leaves the rest of the league barren.

It's not a demographic issue. There are players all over. It is a matter of the Big 10 schools are not willing to do what the SEC schools do to get and keep players.

 

[whaler11]

It's not a demographic issue. There are players all over. It is a matter of the Big 10 schools are not willing to do what the SEC schools do to get and keep players.

Seriously you are joking right? You can google 'where do college football players come from' and look at all the pretty maps and see where players come from? You are being intentionally dim?

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I don't know what to say.

I think that maybe we need to throw you in a volcano or something. It's too perfect.

It just seems that God has sent you to us for a reason and that reason might involve a volcano and some sort of sacrifice. Maybe you're here to help us get rid of this bad juju?

Rest assured, if this works, we will remember you and speak of you often.

(If it doesn't, if we ever mention you, it'll tell people that we have no idea why you jumped into the volcano.)

I've always wanted to see the inside of a volcano.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

I stand by my assertion that the Big 10 will add UConn, Syracuse and/or Boston College before it would add GTech or FSU. With the SEC Network rolling out, the Big 10 has no chance to compete for Cable real estate in the South. No state with an SEC school will pay anywhere near full carriage for the BTN. Yes, the southern markets are growing, but there is already an 800 pound gorilla there that doesn't play nice with others. The competition for cable real estate in the south is already over, and the SEC Network hasn't even started up yet.

If Georgia was playing Kentucky in football, and a ranked GTech was playing a ranked Ohio State, Georgia/Kentucky would double up GTech/tOSU in ratings in the state of Georgia.

Your first sentence is tantamount to saying " the Big 10 will add UConn before it would add GTech or FSU." The rest of the post makes the case that, no matter how much the B1G wants the South Atlantic, it ain't getting it. That puts UNC is in the same category as GTech and FSU.

The "doable" play (and perhaps the only play) for the B1G is to concentrate on the northeast. Together with their existing market that encompasses nearly 40% of the entire nation's population. Taming that should buy them a couple of decades of solid growth.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Your first sentence is tantamount to saying " the Big 10 will add UConn before it would add GTech or FSU." The rest of the post makes the case that, no matter how much the B1G wants the South Atlantic, it ain't getting it. That puts UNC is in the same category as GTech and FSU.

The "doable" play (and perhaps the only play) for the B1G is to concentrate on the northeast. Together with their existing market that encompasses nearly 40% of the entire nation's population. Taming that should buy them a couple of decades of solid growth.

UNC and UVa are a slightly different situation in that they are the #1 programs in their respective markets. I do not see the Big 10 taking the #2 school in a market, no matter how big that market looks. You could make the case that Florida State is a lot more attractive than Georgia Tech because FSU has a higher profile and better market. The problem for the B1G is not just the school itself, but the schedule. FSU vs. Minnesota, Michigan State, Iowa, Indiana and Illinois is just not going to generate much excitement when Florida is playing Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee on consecutive weekends.

And the BTN knows that even if it adds UVa and UNC, the SEC could add Virginia Tech and NC State, and while the BTN could compete on those markets, it would be a battle. Plus, the ACC will still be in the southern states no matter what happens, so there is even more competition in those markets. If, on the other hand, the BTN adds two northeastern schools, there is no competition.

 

[HuskyHawk]

UNC and UVa are a slightly different situation in that they are the #1 programs in their respective markets. I do not see the Big 10 taking the #2 school in a market, no matter how big that market looks. You could make the case that Florida State is a lot more attractive than Georgia Tech because FSU has a higher profile and better market. The problem for the B1G is not just the school itself, but the schedule. FSU vs. Minnesota, Michigan State, Iowa, Indiana and Illinois is just not going to generate much excitement when Florida is playing Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee on consecutive weekends.

And the BTN knows that even if it adds UVa and UNC, the SEC could add Virginia Tech and NC State, and while the BTN could compete on those markets, it would be a battle. Plus, the ACC will still be in the southern states no matter what happens, so there is even more competition in those markets. If, on the other hand, the BTN adds two northeastern schools, there is no competition.

Completely self serving, yet logical. I don't think the B1G is getting UNC. And I think that means either the ACC surviving or merging with the Big 12. If 20 is the new 12 many things are possible. UNC and VT to the SEC, UVA to the B1G with GT leaves 10 teams to merge with the Big 12. Because FSU vs OU will outdraw Florida Kentucky.

 

[pj]

I stand by my assertion that the Big 10 will add UConn, Syracuse and/or Boston College before it would add GTech or FSU. With the SEC Network rolling out, the Big 10 has no chance to compete for Cable real estate in the South. No state with an SEC school will pay anywhere near full carriage for the BTN. Yes, the southern markets are growing, but there is already an 800 pound gorilla there that doesn't play nice with others. The competition for cable real estate in the south is already over, and the SEC Network hasn't even started up yet.

If Georgia was playing Kentucky in football, and a ranked GTech was playing a ranked Ohio State, Georgia/Kentucky would double up GTech/tOSU in ratings in the state of Georgia.

I see your logic:

• UConn should give up football because it is over.
• The B1G should give up on the southeast because it is over.
• The US should surrender in WWII because it was over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor.

 

[ZooCougar]

Seriously you are joking right? You can google 'where do college football players come from' and look at all the pretty maps and see where players come from? You are being intentionally dim?

No, it's not intentional.

 

[SubbaBub]

I've always wanted to see the inside of a volcano.

We're gonna need a few thousand cases of orange soda, first.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[upstater]

I think it's a demographic issue. The players in the upper midwest just aren't as good or as plentiful as the South. So an Ohio State or a Michigan can take all the players and compete but it leaves the rest of the league barren.

Maybe it has a lot to do with players starting kindergarten at the age of 7 down south.

 

[RegisteredUconn]

We're gonna need a few thousand cases of orange soda, first.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

On it.

 

[CL82]

We're gonna need a few thousand cases of orange soda, first.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

Might as well get a few thousand cases of mentos at the same time. You know save on the delivery charges. Next we'll need a lot, and I mean a lot, of papier-mâché.

 

[Chin Diesel]

It's not a demographic issue. There are players all over. It is a matter of the Big 10 schools are not willing to do what the SEC schools do to get and keep players.

Uh, Penn St and Ohio St. say hello.

Yes, the B1G schools can go as low and cheat as much as any SEC school. As do USC, UNC and Miami.

 

[RS9999X]

And the BTN knows that even if it adds UVa and UNC, the SEC could add Virginia Tech and NC State, and while the BTN could compete on those markets, it would be a battle.

Advertising is the hidden gem in the BiG Network. The BiG share of the Network profits in 2011 were $80 million with advertising contributing $30 million to revenues. You want UNC and UVA for advertising. The wealth is East Side in those two states. 2012 figures aren't out yet but estimates are $40 million plus from advertising this year.

As for NYC, UConn is on the Mets channel so that's in the regular tier. Then make a choice; Rutgers or SU? Which would you move to the regular tier? ACC or BiG? The answer's obvious. The ACC will get a couple mil from a regional to carry their games as NECN does in Boston.