Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 559 | The Boneyard

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

JohnFSilver said:
I got no inside stuff. Though I could get it i needed to. But, these are decisions made with a ton of information and explored all angles.

For Arizona, they have a fiduciary responsibility to both schools. I am actually thinking they are going to stay in Pac-9, expand if they can. Why not? Add SDSU, SMU and maybe one more.

I still don’t get why Utah would ever leave Pac-12, unless it new wash and Oregon were gone.
Expand ...

Something that I looked up during this whole saga is the percentage of out of state students in the Arizona university system. Arizona, Arizona State and Northern Arizona get a higher percentage of out of state students than any other university system in the US. Further, more California college students attend the Arizona schools than any other state.

It doesn't take a whole lot of kids at 50k/year a pop to make a pretty compelling argument as to why they should stay in a league with a presence in California (Cal, Stanford, likely San Diego State too).

So while we may be debating $10M/year delta in a tv deal between the Pac and Big12, the decision makers at these schools could be looking at the 1,000 California kids a year paying 50k a year at 50M a year and weighing how the athletic conference changing to a Texas based league could impact that.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Something that I looked up during this whole saga is the percentage of out of state students in the Arizona university system. Arizona, Arizona State and Northern Arizona get a higher percentage of out of state students than any other university system in the US. Further, more California college students attend the Arizona schools than any other state.

It doesn't take a whole lot of kids at 50k/year a pop to make a pretty compelling argument as to why they should stay in a league with a presence in California (Cal, Stanford, likely San Diego State too).

So while we may be debating $10M/year delta in a tv deal between the Pac and Big12, the decision makers at these schools could be looking at the 1,000 California kids a year paying 50k a year at 50M a year and weighing how the athletic conference changing to a Texas based league could impact that.
Expand ...
The Presidents absolutely think about those things. Athletics is a small part of the overall budget. They will look at the big picture.
 
JohnFSilver said:
Nah. There is a large segment of fans and media that are “basketball people.”

They prioritize basketball above the entire athletic department.
Expand ...
Which is okay, but when you throw in like "reproductive emergency" as part of your argument, you are really really reaching.
 
JohnFSilver said:
Apple TV/Amazon/YouTube is way to go. That is going to dominate content in coming years.
Expand ...
It might be the way to go in the future, but it is going to cause the PAC-9 to keep losing members.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Something that I looked up during this whole saga is the percentage of out of state students in the Arizona university system. Arizona, Arizona State and Northern Arizona get a higher percentage of out of state students than any other university system in the US. Further, more California college students attend the Arizona schools than any other state.

It doesn't take a whole lot of kids at 50k/year a pop to make a pretty compelling argument as to why they should stay in a league with a presence in California (Cal, Stanford, likely San Diego State too).

So while we may be debating $10M/year delta in a tv deal between the Pac and Big12, the decision makers at these schools could be looking at the 1,000 California kids a year paying 50k a year at 50M a year and weighing how the athletic conference changing to a Texas based league could impact that.
Expand ...
While a smaller share to be sure, I think I saw Colorado gets three times as many kids from California as Texas. It was one of the things that led them to the pac last decade, but wasn’t compelling enough now.
 
ec33 said:
It might be the way to go in the future, but it is going to cause the PAC-9 to keep losing members.
Expand ...
Maybe not. Many in Pac 9 need to buy time. This may be the perfect band aid.
 
JeepCSC said:
While a smaller share to be sure, I think I saw Colorado gets three times as many kids from California as Texas. It was one of the things that led them to the pac last decade, but wasn’t compelling enough now.
Expand ...

Would be interesting to see how no UCLA and USC impacted their projections for students (athletics tv money aside).
 
JohnFSilver said:
Apple TV/Amazon/YouTube is way to go. That is going to dominate content in coming years.
Expand ...
Maybe. But I thought the NFL games on Amazon were terrible/inconvenient/cumbersome. I watched once and refused to go back.
 
JohnFSilver said:
Nah. There is a large segment of fans and media that are “basketball people.”

They prioritize basketball above the entire athletic department.
Expand ...
I am a “basketball first” fan. Been a die hard my entire life. I’m a relatively new UConn football fan (never really cared for college football until recently. Only NFL).

So my perspective may be somewhat unique…I still think the Big 12 is the right move. Would it suck to lose the Big East Tournament? Of course. But I’m more concerned with UConn getting left in the dust financially than I am with our ability to compete in the Big 12. As long as Hurley is here, we will be operating at an elite level. Not worried about recruiting either because we are a national brand in basketball, and the Big 12 is arguably the best basketball league.

I want an on-campus football stadium and Gampel is in dire need of some renovations to the concourses. None of that happens unless we are getting a P5 TV check.
 
UConnTrumbull said:
The problem with Amazon is that every Thursday Night Football game was crappy match ups. The production was fine.
Expand ...
The real issue is right now for college athletics is ESPN and FS1 are provided by all cable companies.
If one streaming platform purchases ESPN, and another purchases(exclusive with FOX), then it forces ppl to purchase a streaming channel(big issue if they don't already own it). This causes resentment from the fan base.

Just look at the AAC TV deal and what we escaped coverage wise with that.
Streaming companies need to find a way to provide for all at significant discount...

Otherwise Google and Youtube TV will purchase them both and essential become cable without the cables.

I don't blame the PAC-9 and counting for denying this current offer at all.
 
Streaming, as constituted, is not the future. They have to integrate the platforms into the typical channel surfing model. Having to download/update apps, plug in USB devices, etc is too much work and/or too confusing for it to be adopted en masse. This is before we consider the current web of a la carte streaming subscriptions people pay for across numerous platforms.
 
brasssbonanzaa said:
Streaming, as constituted, is not the future. They have to integrate the platforms into the typical channel surfing model. Having to download/update apps, plug in USB devices, etc is too much work and/or too confusing for it to be adopted en masse. This is before we consider the current web of a la carte streaming subscriptions people pay for across numerous platforms.
Expand ...

You can buy a 50" smart TV for $200 that can get any app you want.
 
For anyone interested. The Arizona BOR meeting starts at 6:30 eastern time. Search ABOR on YouTube.
 
Rico444 said:
You can buy a 50" smart TV for $200 that can get any app you want.
Expand ...
I started to make the same reply, then I think what he's talking about is the 10 seconds to log into each individual app.
 
Rico444 said:
You can buy a 50" smart TV for $200 that can get any app you want.
Expand ...
Access to the hardware is not the point, it's the platform. Apps must be downloaded, updated, often using clunky and confusing embedded UIs made by the TV manufacturer. You have to input your email and a password to get access to the content. It's not as simple as plug in the TV, hit channel 849 and get ESPN. That's before you consider the payment, subscription, sufficient internet connection, etc.

Until it's as simple as that, it won't have the same broad appeal. For the mass-market consumer, one or more of the above things are a barrier to adopting streaming as an acceptable primary platform.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
32
Guests online
1,016
Total visitors
1,048
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
163,972
Messages
4,377,054
Members
10,168
Latest member
CTFan142


.
..
Top Bottom