Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 67 | The Boneyard

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

UCONN was a founding member of what became an incredible basketball conference.
UCONN also had the good fortune to become a member of a BCS conference as it made the jump to 1-A.
I personally think UCONN had one play and that was the Big East.
So much blame being tossed around but in the end, UCONN was just unlucky. Football schools took a left, basketball schools took a right, and UCONN was stuck in the middle.
 
UCONN13KC said:
UCONN was a founding member of what became an incredible basketball conference.
UCONN also had the good fortune to become a member of a BCS conference as it made the jump to 1-A.
I personally think UCONN had one play and that was the Big East.
So much blame being tossed around but in the end, UCONN was just unlucky. Football schools took a left, basketball schools took a right, and UCONN was stuck in the middle.
Expand ...

I think this is a big part of it. I do think better leadership would have got us in front of Syracuse, Pitt or Louisville for an ACC bid, but we are where we are.
 
UCONN13KC said:
UCONN was a founding member of what became an incredible basketball conference.
UCONN also had the good fortune to become a member of a BCS conference as it made the jump to 1-A.
I personally think UCONN had one play and that was the Big East.
So much blame being tossed around but in the end, UCONN was just unlucky. Football schools took a left, basketball schools took a right, and UCONN was stuck in the middle.
Expand ...
If you want to go back that far...imagine what could have been if Mike Tranghese had said yes to a BE network back then...my theory is that there would have been a P-6 and the ACC may have lost FSU to the BE instead.
 
FDNY99 said:
If you want to go back that far...imagine what could have been if Mike Tranghese had said yes to a BE network back then...my theory is that there would have been a P-6 and the ACC may have lost FSU to the BE instead.
Expand ...
The Big East & Tranghese's big mistakes: Not bringing in FSU along with Miami, allowing the Seminoles to go to the ACC; Not bringing in Penn St. for all sports.
 
coachcap said:
The Big East & Tranghese's big mistakes: Not bringing in FSU along with Miami, allowing the Seminoles to go to the ACC; Not bringing in Penn St. for all sports.
Expand ...
That would have been B1G network $$ before Delany & Company even thought of their own network! The only question I have is would that league had split with the football schools going one way and the hoops schools going the other. It would have been interesting to see how they split a share of net work $ between football schools and non-football schools.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
I think this is a big part of it. I do think better leadership would have got us in front of Syracuse, Pitt or Louisville for an ACC bid, but we are where we are.
Expand ...

I don't think Syracuse. The ACC loved the idea of playing in the Carrier Dome. The other two we should have out maneuvered.
 
FDNY99 said:
That would have been B1G network $$ before Delany & Company even thought of their own network! The only question I have is would that league had split with the football schools going one way and the hoops schools going the other. It would have been interesting to see how they split a share of net work $ between football schools and non-football schools.
Expand ...
Probably no need to split if everyone was getting paid. Basketball,schools didn't want out until it was clear the big east was going to lose BCS status and $$$.
 
If ESPN was serious about making an ACC Network, they would just say it.

Swofford is starting to press on the ACC Network since it was one of the reasons why he got schools to sign the GOR. If that network doesn't come, you know some schools are going to get restless when the B1G and SEC are clearing a dozen million dollars more a year than they are.
 
.-.
jlarson said:
If ESPN was serious about making an ACC Network, they would just say it.

Swofford is starting to press on the ACC Network since it was one of the reasons why he got schools to sign the GOR. If that network doesn't come, you know some schools are going to get restless when the B1G and SEC are clearing a dozen million dollars more a year than they are.
Expand ...

I think that for the most part most of the ACC schools are content and happy to be a part of the league. Clearly it's an easier path for a FSU, Clemson or Virginia Tech to make the CFB as opposed to going through the SEC or to most seasons the B1G.

The only thing I could see is if the money becomes just too big to ignore and there is an invite to be had in the other leagues. The states of Virginia and North Carolina seem to be the ultimate prizes but I have an easier time seeing VT or NC State going than UVA or UNC.
 
itgoeslike said:
"Right on target" is another way of saying "It doesn't look good, but it's what we expected."
Expand ...

Teel is absolutely a fan boy and not terribly perceptive.

Swofford feeds him the same line a different way every time out.
 
Fishy said:
Teel is absolutely a fan boy and not terribly perceptive.

Swofford feeds him the same line a different way every time out.
Expand ...

That's somewhat generous. I was thinking more like Teel is a total puppet. He's like the ACC's Baghdad Bob.
 
kyleslamb said:
That's somewhat generous. I was thinking more like Teel is a total puppet. He's like the ACC's Baghdad Bob.
Expand ...

It really is a brutal piece of journalism.

The headline is that they're 'right on target'.

Sentence two admits that Swofford said nothing and that the author has a 'sense', (read 'hope'), that the network will launch in 2017. And then he tries to plump up the positives.

And then Swofford slides the sticky bits right past Teel...

“If we’re going to do this,” Swofford said, “we need to do it in the right way from the beginning that gives us the opportunity to have long-term success, and that’s what we’re trying to do and time it in a way so the distribution can be good, if not great, coming out, if we go this route. The other alternative is larger rights fees (from ESPN).”

And boom. They have nothing.

The issue for the ACC is that they signed their deal and never made provisions for a network. Now, they want ESPN to put more money into something they already own and then have it compete on some level with an already solid business, the SEC Network. It's not working by anyone's rational measure.

The tell is the 'alternative' - asking ESPN for more money.

Well, good luck.
 
Fishy said:
It really is a brutal piece of journalism.

The headline is that they're 'right on target'.

Sentence two admits that Swofford said nothing and that the author has a 'sense', (read 'hope'), that the network will launch in 2017. And then he tries to plump up the positives.

And then Swofford slides the sticky bits right past Teel...

“If we’re going to do this,” Swofford said, “we need to do it in the right way from the beginning that gives us the opportunity to have long-term success, and that’s what we’re trying to do and time it in a way so the distribution can be good, if not great, coming out, if we go this route. The other alternative is larger rights fees (from ESPN).”

And boom. They have nothing.

The issue for the ACC is that they signed their deal and never made provisions for a network. Now, they want ESPN to put more money into something they already own and then have it compete on some level with an already solid business, the SEC Network. It's not working by anyone's rational measure.

The tell is the 'alternative' - asking ESPN for more money.

Well, good luck.
Expand ...
The only path to more money for the ACC is getting ND football as a full member. Cue TerryD to tell us the odds of that happening.
 
I can't see ESPN ponying up more cash to the ACC given that total homes # is shrinking.

I can see ESPN paying for another raid, if it causes a conference to collapse and decreases their overall costs.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
I can't see ESPN ponying up more cash to the ACC given that total homes # is shrinking.

I can see ESPN paying for another raid, if it causes a conference to collapse and decreases their overall costs.
Expand ...

I don't see that total # of homes part as being much of an issue. Most of those were likely homes that didn't watch ESPN anyway. If they did they will be back using ESPN plus. You can't just stop watching sports cold-turkey.
 
CTGoonie said:
I don't see that total # of homes part as being much of an issue. Most of those were likely homes that didn't watch ESPN anyway. If they did they will be back using ESPN plus. You can't just stop watching sports cold-turkey.
Expand ...
Good point, but ESPN $6.60 +/- per home is paid by sports fans and non sports fans alike. So if people unplug from cable, that second group won't be signing up online.
 
Fishy said:
It really is a brutal piece of journalism.

The headline is that they're 'right on target'.

Sentence two admits that Swofford said nothing and that the author has a 'sense', (read 'hope'), that the network will launch in 2017. And then he tries to plump up the positives.

And then Swofford slides the sticky bits right past Teel...

“If we’re going to do this,” Swofford said, “we need to do it in the right way from the beginning that gives us the opportunity to have long-term success, and that’s what we’re trying to do and time it in a way so the distribution can be good, if not great, coming out, if we go this route. The other alternative is larger rights fees (from ESPN).”

And boom. They have nothing.

The issue for the ACC is that they signed their deal and never made provisions for a network. Now, they want ESPN to put more money into something they already own and then have it compete on some level with an already solid business, the SEC Network. It's not working by anyone's rational measure.

The tell is the 'alternative' - asking ESPN for more money.

Well, good luck.
Expand ...

The larger rights fees Swofford is referring to could be the $2M consolation prize that each school gets if there is no ACCN. The reality is that the ACC is a spectator in these negotiations. ESPN has to calculate the lesser of two evils—the cost to recover the third tier rights they sold off and launch the network, or pay the consolation prize.
 
CTGoonie said:
I don't see that total # of homes part as being much of an issue. Most of those were likely homes that didn't watch ESPN anyway. If they did they will be back using ESPN plus. You can't just stop watching sports cold-turkey.
Expand ...
A heck of a lot of homes don't watch sports. Many more than sports fans realize.
 
right on target. That must be the largest fuzziest target on the east coast. the last line of his article is classic: "At the risk of shameless self-promotion: My book, “Press Pass: Thirty Years of Bylines, Headlines and Deadlines,” is available here." haha.
 
.-.
uconnfan68 said:
But they pay anyway if they want cable.
Expand ...
Unless they become cord cutters like two members of my extended family. I have two different HH in my extended family blissfully enjoying a post cable tv life. Both are affluent - just didn't think cable was delivering value. And yep, both households watch zero sports, so there goes another two who for decades paid for tv sports w/o watch a thing. The EZ tv $ gravy train for cable sports peaked two years ago.
 
David Ubben ‏@davidubben · 3h3 hours ago
Mike Gundy: "In my opinion, there's going to be two teams added (to the Big 12). ... That just seems to be the direction it's going."

David Ubben ‏@davidubben · 3h3 hours ago
Should clarify that Gundy didn't necessarily express a strong desire for expansion. Just his read on the situation.


David Ubben
@davidubben
Columnist and TV analyst, Fox Sports Southwest.
 


Big 12 on their sights soon. Texas Tech could do an "A&M"-type of move. :cool:

Tech, Okie State, Kansas State, TCU -> PAC
Kansas and Oklahoma - > Big Ten
Texas, UConn, Baylor, Iowa State, West Virginia - > ACC
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,221
Messages
4,557,838
Members
10,442
Latest member
StatsMan


Top Bottom