Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 777 | The Boneyard
.-.

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

ZooCougar said:
Well. Nobody here seems to even agree with you and we barely rake in $4M in TV with the Bug East sooooo….
Expand ...

Sacha Baron Cohen Thumbs Up GIF by Amazon Prime Video
 
Platt81 said:
This is a weird take. They are both opponents of UConn this season. First off, plenty care, and secondly why wouldn’t you be interested in how future opponents are playing?
Expand ...
Its in the post you quoted. I ony follow UConn men's BB, then the tournament. I honestly don't care who their opponents are playing. Plenty of people care about Boise State FB results too. They're called Boise State fans.
 
One of the major reasons the BE TV ratings are worse is because they are on FOX and not ESPN.
 
noeynox said:
No one cares about the Big East schools not named UConn/Nova. Marquette and Creighton may be good now but those team successes tend to be cyclical or related to the head coach like Wichita State a few years back. No one is going to call the entire tournament "fraudulent" cause UConn and Nova got shafted. It will simply be seen as a consequence of change.
Expand ...
 
.-.
noeynox said:
More like Fox overpaid for content when they were getting FS1 and FS2 off the ground. They have more content now, and less available slots because of it. Less incentive to over pay also.
Expand ...
I’m fascinated to see how this next go-round goes. The Big East is the perfect cheap filler content for a cable sports network- can stick it on FS1/FS2 without worrying about a conference network since they aren’t a big enough deal to have one, daily content in two time slots, and doesn’t cost you a lot of money.

They have to put SOMETHING on during December, Jan, Feb when their college football coverage ends, as long as the BE remains cheap enough to make $ on the ad revenue then it makes sense for FOX to continue the relationship in (relatively) its current format. The question becomes, when inevitably the BE asks for more money, does FOX say yes or do they say “we have other content that can also get 286k views nightly for a fraction of the cost” and walk away.
 
Drew said:
I’m fascinated to see how this next go-round goes. The Big East is the perfect cheap filler content for a cable sports network- can stick it on FS1/FS2 without worrying about a conference network since they aren’t a big enough deal to have one, daily content in two time slots, and doesn’t cost you a lot of money.

They have to put SOMETHING on during December, Jan, Feb when their college football coverage ends, as long as the BE remains cheap enough to make $ on the ad revenue then it makes sense for FOX to continue the relationship in (relatively) its current format. The question becomes, when inevitably the BE asks for more money, does FOX say yes or do they say “we have other content that can also get 286k views nightly for a fraction of the cost” and walk away.
Expand ...
And FOX just stretched its budget by paying for a piece of the B12 expansion & is paying for most of the Oregon Washington move to the B1G.

How much money do they have left to spend in college sports?
 
In the article Drew posted there was something that struck me:

The Great Split is no longer a far-fetched idea or a long-shot theory. It is instead a looming reality in light of legal challenges facing college athletics, most notably the costly House antitrust case against the NCAA and the power conferences.

The case, seeking as much as $3 billion in retroactive name, image and likeness (NIL) and broadcasting revenue payments, is the latest lawsuit expected to chip away at the NCAA’s bedrock of amateurism. The case will, undoubtedly, force the organization to distribute more revenue to athletes like those legal losses before it (think: cost-of-attendance payments in 2015 and Alston academic-related stipends in 2021).


However, the House case is much more significant, as it opens the door for direct pay to athletes by seeking the elimination of the NCAA’s NIL rules. One SEC president describes its outcome as financially “catastrophic.” There is talk of FBS schools each chipping in upwards of $5-10 million in potential settlement payments.
Expand ...

But it is the House case that may drive the final wedge between the haves and have-nots of college sports. The Power Five shares CFP and NCAA tournament revenue with other schools.

A dividing line is forming between the schools and conferences that can and cannot afford to contribute to payments if the House case is settled or lost.
Expand ...
It seems like it's going to be a case of if you can afford to be in the game or not. Can you afford to pony up the bill for the outcome of the House case? If you can, then you have got yourself a piece of the revenue. If you can't, thanks for your interest in playing what was once NCAA football.

This is one area where I kinda feel like we can play the game. As a large state university, I have to hope we have the funds to stay in this if it is just a financial game. If they can get a way through this gate, they can share the insane revenue that will come in with the new CFP, which the article projects to be in the $1.7-2 billion range annually.

The whole thing scares me because it really seems like the gig is up. The ship is actually sinking and the last life boat is actually gone. We keep hoping the next thing will come but it is looking like it's almost too late.
 
.-.
UCFBfan said:
In the article Drew posted there was something that struck me:




It seems like it's going to be a case of if you can afford to be in the game or not. Can you afford to pony up the bill for the outcome of the House case? If you can, then you have got yourself a piece of the revenue. If you can't, thanks for your interest in playing what was once NCAA football.

This is one area where I kinda feel like we can play the game. As a large state university, I have to hope we have the funds to stay in this if it is just a financial game. If they can get a way through this gate, they can share the insane revenue that will come in with the new CFP, which the article projects to be in the $1.7-2 billion range annually.

The whole thing scares me because it really seems like the gig is up. The ship is actually sinking and the last life boat is actually gone. We keep hoping the next thing will come but it is looking like it's almost too late.
Expand ...
To be honest- in no way shape or form do I see the state ponying up any money at all to support UConn football at the future state “power” level. They can’t even get money to run the program currently- the last HC had to pay an OC out of his own pocket and the current HC can’t afford to hire a DC with the existing budget. The basketball staff of 4 makes more money than the football staff of 11. Think about how hard that is to do from a sheer numbers standpoint. Then, on top of it, the coach is complaining publicly (and has been for weeks) that we have essentially zero donor support for NIL. There is no existing football NIL group to support UConn (although I am hearing rumblings this is finally in the works). Do you know how insane it is we still don’t have a dedicated football collective? The rules came out 3 years ago. It’s preposterous.

The state (and donor base) will absolutely pay through the nose to participate in what is “big time” college basketball. The question is- how much $ is that cost? Because if 20% of media deals are being rationed to basketball and teams in the B1G are taking 20% of their $100M/annual TV money and allocating a portion of that $20M to their players, that’s going to be really difficult to compete against factoring in the additional NIL money that will continue on top of these future revenue sharing payments to athletes.

We don’t even have the money to fix or rebuild our existing decrepit facilities and previously tried to go cheap out of paying the Kevin Ollie buyout because of the cost. I don’t know how much $ it will take to compete in future state high major basketball but there is a non-zero chance that (eventually) we are priced out if we don’t see a significant change in future revenues
 
UCFBfan said:
In the article Drew posted there was something that struck me:




It seems like it's going to be a case of if you can afford to be in the game or not. Can you afford to pony up the bill for the outcome of the House case? If you can, then you have got yourself a piece of the revenue. If you can't, thanks for your interest in playing what was once NCAA football.

This is one area where I kinda feel like we can play the game. As a large state university, I have to hope we have the funds to stay in this if it is just a financial game. If they can get a way through this gate, they can share the insane revenue that will come in with the new CFP, which the article projects to be in the $1.7-2 billion range annually.

The whole thing scares me because it really seems like the gig is up. The ship is actually sinking and the last life boat is actually gone. We keep hoping the next thing will come but it is looking like it's almost too late.
Expand ...
It will be about who can opt in. If you are willing to opt in, and the big boys try to shut you out, that opens up an anti-trust lawsuit.

I firmly believe when revenue sharing comes into play that there will be about 90-100 FBS football schools that opt in and an additional 50-60 basketball-first schools that opt in.
 
Drew said:
I’m fascinated to see how this next go-round goes. The Big East is the perfect cheap filler content for a cable sports network- can stick it on FS1/FS2 without worrying about a conference network since they aren’t a big enough deal to have one, daily content in two time slots, and doesn’t cost you a lot of money.

They have to put SOMETHING on during December, Jan, Feb when their college football coverage ends, as long as the BE remains cheap enough to make $ on the ad revenue then it makes sense for FOX to continue the relationship in (relatively) its current format. The question becomes, when inevitably the BE asks for more money, does FOX say yes or do they say “we have other content that can also get 286k views nightly for a fraction of the cost” and walk away.
Expand ...
Yup
 
.-.
As long as the Big East keeps its visibility on linear TV and gets a small bump (to 5-6 million), I will be thrilled. Adding Gonzaga (and going to 22 league games) may be what's necessary to accelerate that bump.
 
Was the B12 dalliance the last gasp, or is there one more Hail Mary attempt coming for UConn athletics(NIL Collective)? Everyone posting seems to agree more or less that the piper is coming and if you can't afford to pay him, no more music. Trying to picture what the "party is over" scenario looks like if you aren't in one of the chairs when the music stops. Is it a larger, NE/Mid Atlantic version of a Yankee Conference? Don't have the time or imagination to go through that exercise. So.....

I'll just enjoy our Big East Huskies as they are today and Happy Thanksgiving to all Yarders.
 
Dream Jobbed 2.0 said:
That’s not the point
Expand ...
I think people are underestimating the Big East. We literally were just grandfathered into the new NIT structure with two auto bids, same as every other power league. There is respect for the Big East among the football power leagues. The only reason the Gavitt games is ending is because the Big Ten is going to 22 conference games. We have a challenge with the Big 12 in basketball. We (the Big East) can schedule home and home contests with P4 programs in basketball OOC.

Football is a different story, but the ACC schools respect us enough to schedule us H/H in that as well.
 
shizzle787 said:
It will be about who can opt in. If you are willing to opt in, and the big boys try to shut you out, that opens up an anti-trust lawsuit.

I firmly believe when revenue sharing comes into play that there will be about 90-100 FBS football schools that opt in and an additional 50-60 basketball-first schools that opt in.
Expand ...
There is no world in which the “final state” ends up with 100 FBS teams and another 60 non-football schools. Zero chance. The A5 isn’t leading a breakup of the existing governance structure so they can still have to accommodate Temple, Xavier, San Jose State and St. Joseph’s. You’re even dumber than I thought if you believe that to be the case.

It’s going to end with like 50 teams between the B1G and SEC splitting the vast majority of $ from the NCAA Tournament and CFP while everyone else gets the scraps.

They’re not going to stop playing teams outside of the P2 in the future- they’re just not going to give them any money for the “privilege” of playing with them. Which means UConn (and other schools) will have to find the $$ to make up the gap from boosters and other sources. That is the terrifying part- in 20 years is the $ gap so big that we can’t compete in player acquisition and retention if we’re not in a league with much more revenue than our current one? It’s probable.
 
You can already see the P6 gaining an advantage in moves affecting NIT basketball...and some mid major commissioners and coaches have squeaked.

Last week, the NIT board of managers announced that regular-season champions who do not win their conference tournaments and are not selected for the NCAA tournament will not receive an automatic bid to the NIT. Instead, the NIT will guarantee bids for two teams from each of the six power conferences as well as two spots for the top two teams in the NET rankings that were not selected for the NCAA tournament.
 
.-.
Drew said:
There is no world in which the “final state” ends up with 100 FBS teams and another 60 non-football schools. Zero chance. The A5 isn’t leading a breakup of the existing governance structure so they can still have to accommodate Temple, Xavier, San Jose State and St. Joseph’s. You’re even dumber than I thought if you believe that to be the case.

It’s going to end with like 50 teams between the B1G and SEC splitting the vast majority of $ from the NCAA Tournament and CFP while everyone else gets the scraps.

They’re not going to stop playing teams outside of the P2 in the future- they’re just not going to give them any money for the “privilege” of playing with them. Which means UConn (and other schools) will have to find the $$ to make up the gap from boosters and other sources. That is the terrifying part- in 20 years is the $ gap so big that we can’t compete in player acquisition and retention if we’re not in a league with much more revenue than our current one? It’s probable.
Expand ...
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. In the late 70s and early 80s there were about 60 or so schools in the CFA that tried to create Division 1-A. Some others were thrown in to fill in the numbers, but several leagues that didn't want to drop down but were pressured to do so ultimately fought stayed up (MAC and Big West). It's not as easy to shed schools as you think.

The NCAA literally just had a transformation committee whose main (unstated) goal of Greg Sankey was to shrink Division 1. It FAILED. 1 team left Division 1 (St. Thomas of Brooklyn).

Also, if you really think there will be no major college sports programs in New York state or New England (basically what you are suggesting because Syracuse and BC won't make the cut), you are insane. That is 10% of the US population that is just going to be shut out of major college athletics. LOL. No better way to kill your earning potential as an organization than by shutting out the wealthiest region in the country.

#1 These things don't move as fast as you think.

#2 Compromises are made. If anyone thinks there is going to be a clean break of 50 schools, again LOL. Yes, 40 or so schools (in the Big Ten and SEC) will be making significantly more, but they can't leave the NCAA due to the liability shield.

Who the final schools are left is anyone's guess, but I would bet my life it won't only be 50 schools.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
63
Guests online
9,089
Total visitors
9,152
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
166,537
Messages
4,483,511
Members
10,358
Latest member
wynela


Top Bottom