Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 687 | The Boneyard
.-.

Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell.

CL82 said:
Good point. Connecticut is an unaffiliated independent. I don't think that's better if your name isn't Notre Dame.
Expand ...
I think uconn football needs to built its brand..it looks like we will have a good team this year…we need Mora to stay and do his magic… then we will get a better tv deal and conferences will come calling
 
Beachview said:
I think uconn football needs to built its brand..it looks like we will have a good team this year…we need Mora to stay and do his magic… then we will get a better tv deal and conferences will come calling
Expand ...

As he gets results, pay the guy. He doesn’t need to be job hopping at this point.
 
HuskyHawk said:
The B1G took four schools that had about 75% of the eyeballs for the Pac12. The Big XII took regional schools that fit perfectly with the schools they have. Several rivalries were maintained or renewed.

B1G went nationwide in a major way. The Big XII shored up dominance in the southwest/mountain/plains region. When you go to a sports bar in those states, it’s going to be a Big XII bar. This is something the B1G enjoys in its core territory, as does the SEC. As they expand they lose that. St. Louis is not “SEC country” for example. Maryland certainly is not “Big Ten country”.

ACC taking UConn should be an easy decision for the same reason the corner schools made sense to the Big XII. They should have grabbed Rutgers long ago too.
Expand ...
I understand why the conferences want to expand. I do not understand why ESPN and FOX just let the PAC die because they didn't want to pay them, but now they're okay with paying all of the schools even more money to be members of different conferences. That's what makes zero sense to me.
 
.-.
aburks41 said:
I understand why the conferences want to expand. I do not understand why ESPN and FOX just let the PAC die because they didn't want to pay them, but now they're okay with paying all of the schools even more money to be members of different conferences. That's what makes zero sense to me.
Expand ...

The ratings of the games in the new conferences will be higher than the ratings of the games in the PAC-12. Higher ratings = higher charge for commercials = more revenue for the media partners.
 
uconnsouth said:
Fox was never going to let the Big12 take UConn. Fox gets UConn for pennies in the BE.

Why would Fox pay UConn 8x more --- all while destroying the amazing Big East content they have?

It was never going to happen, no matter what Yormack wanted
Expand ...
The networks don’t control conference realignment!
 
Rufus said:
The ratings of the games in the new conferences will be higher than the ratings of the games in the PAC-12. Higher ratings = higher charge for commercials = more revenue for the media partners.
Expand ...
Maybe for the old Pac teams, but will overall Big 10 football TV ratings go up? I'm not so sure as adding more teams does not increase the number of desirable matchups. The number of games that Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State play hasn't changed and they will end up playing more games against less desirable opponents. Look at USC/Ohio St. They will probably play once every 2 to 4 years in an 18 team conference.
 
WestCoastHusky said:
They were negotiating. Apple upped their offer $2M per school. I am guessing they didn't see FOX pull the Oregon and Washington card at the last sec to sink the Apple deal. Stuff like this happens, and it is part of the negotiation for many businesses. These conference realignments are pretty much like cutthroat corporate negotiations. Apple simply got played this time. I am sure they will be more prepared next time.
Expand ...
I don't know that they got played so much as they didn't understand the dynamics of the business in which they were trying to negotiate in agreement. They were probably no more than $9 million per school off of an agreement that would've left the conference intact.

I am sure that they will be more prepared next time too. But it is tough to call somebody a savvy negotiator who was completely tone deaf in a negotiation.
 
.-.
Blades said:
Well ESPN has never been Uconn's friend except when the Rasmussen's started the company, but who actually likes and wants to help out the tax man ?
Expand ...
It tends to be a bad negotiating position to piss off the people you're actually asking for something. In this case, insisting on UConn versus say Pittsburgh, would not have cost them a dollar and would have created good will. That's the low hanging fruit of negotiation.
 
Beachview said:
I think uconn football needs to built its brand..it looks like we will have a good team this year…we need Mora to stay and do his magic… then we will get a better tv deal and conferences will come calling
Expand ...
No.
Any UConn success under Mora will be deemed ‘Mora’s bump’, not UConn’s.

The argument will be, ‘yeah, but that was with Mora as coach, what happens if he leaves?’
 
aburks41 said:
I understand why the conferences want to expand. I do not understand why ESPN and FOX just let the PAC die because they didn't want to pay them, but now they're okay with paying all of the schools even more money to be members of different conferences. That's what makes zero sense to me.
Expand ...
It’s about siphoning the value. Big got its mega brands. The Big 12 picked over what’s left and took the four corners.

Whatever is left has the least value. Funny that’s what ACC is going after hoping to increase its value. Them taking those schools smacks of weakness.
 
.-.
WestCoastHusky said:
I think the ACC leftovers would be beyond stupid if they don't want to expand now. However, they are tied to the dumb long-term contract they signed with ESPN, and there isn't an automatic clause to pay the new team(s) more money pro rata so that will have to be negotiated with ESPN.

The question isn't if the ACC would like to expand or not, the real question is if ESPN is interested in paying some money to get some extra inventory. I am not sure what is the worth of UCONN, but our men's and women's basketball content got to be worth something.
Expand ...
Not enough apparently
 
aburks41 said:
I understand why the conferences want to expand. I do not understand why ESPN and FOX just let the PAC die because they didn't want to pay them, but now they're okay with paying all of the schools even more money to be members of different conferences. That's what makes zero sense to me.
Expand ...

That's exactly what happened with the old Big East.
 
Harvard, Yale, Stanford and Princeton are the Big 4 of college endowments. They have the wealth and prestige to avoid temptation when it comes to college athletics. I get it. We all succumb to temptation at times. We have seen these institutions bend when it comes to academic standards for athletes, flexibility around NIL and post-season tournaments.

Stanford currently stands at an important crossroads. Their conference colleagues have left them behind in conference realignment. Their president has been ousted amidst allegations of ethical improprieties. They may even decide to join some of their former colleagues in a P2 conference at a reduced economic. However, if Stanford decides to join the ACC or the Big 12, it will be the most extreme case of capitulation we have ever seen in college athletics. I hope it doesn’t happen.
 
.-.
How Sway?! said:
Yeah those schools are going to leave a conference that pays more and fits their geographical make up for the B12.
Expand ...
If Clemson, fsu, unc and uva leave, these four schools will most certainly pick the big 12 over the remaining acc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
435
Guests online
3,535
Total visitors
3,970
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,490
Messages
4,481,474
Members
10,356
Latest member
wynela


Top Bottom