Key tweets, and it's all gone to Hell. | Page 714 | The Boneyard
.-.

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

AZHuskiePop said:
Do you understand They’re the Flagship University of the most populous state in The US with 40 million people . They have assets of $136 billion and are typically ranked as the top public academic institutions in the country and is world famous .
The only shocking thing about CaL is with that type of weight they find themselves on the outside at all .
Stanford and Cal ignored athletics as trivial entertainment for the masses or they would both be in the B1G . It demonstrates that if you want to play you better be serous
Expand ...
Do you realize that most of their students don’t care about US sports at all?
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Isn't the concern with UConn athletics not being in the P4 a monetary one? So the solution would be to join the P4...for zero media dollars?
Expand ...
It's lunacy in here. Next they'll be saying UConn should pay Oregon State and Washington State for the privilege of sharing a conference with them. They've completely lost the script.
 
superjohn said:
It's lunacy in here. Next they'll be saying UConn should pay Oregon State and Washington State for the privilege of sharing a conference with them. They've completely lost the script.
Expand ...
What are you talking about? UConn would forego media distributions for seven years. If Stanford and SMU are willing to do it to get into the club, why aren't we? This isn't the Big 12. This is the ACC- a league we have been trying to get into for years. A league with our former rivals (Syracuse, Pitt, BC, Louisville) + Tobacco Road. If we get a half share starting in 2031 and a full share in 2036, we would be foolish not to accept. We get less than 4.5 million per year from our TV deals. We can survive seven years of lost TV revenue with just the uptick in ticket sales alone. Put your pride at the door.
 
shizzle787 said:
What are you talking about? UConn would forego media distributions for seven years. If Stanford and SMU are willing to do it to get into the club, why aren't we? This isn't the Big 12. This is the ACC- a league we have been trying to get into for years. A league with our former rivals (Syracuse, Pitt, BC, Louisville) + Tobacco Road. If we get a half share starting in 2031 and a full share in 2036, we would be foolish not to accept. We get less than 4.5 million per year from our TV deals. We can survive seven years of lost TV revenue with just the uptick in ticket sales alone. Put your pride at the door.
Expand ...
Stanford doesn't have a conference and they aren't going to play for free in the ACC for 7 years.
 
.-.
shizzle787 said:
What are you talking about? UConn would forego media distributions for seven years. If Stanford and SMU are willing to do it to get into the club, why aren't we? This isn't the Big 12. This is the ACC- a league we have been trying to get into for years. A league with our former rivals (Syracuse, Pitt, BC, Louisville) + Tobacco Road. If we get a half share starting in 2031 and a full share in 2036, we would be foolish not to accept. We get less than 4.5 million per year from our TV deals. We can survive seven years of lost TV revenue with just the uptick in ticket sales alone. Put your pride at the door.
Expand ...

For one thing UConn doesn't have Stanford or SMU money.

Also private schools have more leeway with spending than state schools.
 
Chin Diesel said:
For one thing UConn doesn't have Stanford or SMU money.

Also private schools have more leeway with spending than state schools.
Expand ...
This. SMU boosters can support the program for years which is why they can join up for nothing for a few years.
 
UCFBfan said:
This. SMU boosters can support the program for years which is why they can join up for nothing for a few years.
Expand ...

More than "can" they are willing.

Plenty of money in state of CT but those with the most don't see a need or desire to drop it on UConn athletics.
 
Chin Diesel said:
More than "can" they are willing.

Plenty of money in state of CT but those with the most don't see a need or desire to drop it on UConn athletics.
Expand ...
Sadly, nearly all of those who have made billions running hedge funds were educated at other schools (primarily Ivies).
 
Chin Diesel said:
For one thing UConn doesn't have Stanford or SMU money.

Also private schools have more leeway with spending than state schools.
Expand ...
But far less access to capital.
 
.-.
Chin Diesel said:
More than "can" they are willing.

Plenty of money in state of CT but those with the most don't see a need or desire to drop it on UConn athletics.
Expand ...
I dont see how UConn can agree to such a deal AND RAMP UP spending on football coaches/staff. That is what it is going to take to get this program to a level where P5/4 conferences don't say "but they're football is terrible."
 
noeynox said:
I dont see how UConn can agree to such a deal AND RAMP UP spending on football coaches/staff. That is what it is going to take to get this program to a level where P5/4 conferences don't say "but they're football is terrible."
Expand ...
It's more about fans than winning, but winning is what we need for fans. Nobody believes me, but I think some of these football focused schools really want a "culture of football". It's not just what we put on the field. What are our traditions on game day? We scoff at this stuff, but it matters to them.

The Rent was fine for our needs but a generic stadium on an airfield didn't really help establish that culture.
 
businesslawyer said:
O.K., I'll bite. You posted the link. I assume you therefore must know what it means to have the "number one nielsen brand rating" or you wouldn't have wasted our time posting it. Thus, would you mind telling us what it means, since the links seem to just state that without telling us how the term is defined?

Because I'd hate to think you post nice sounding headlines without knowing what you're linking to.
Expand ...
Age catches up to all of us, myself included, so I’m not going to make fun of you. One of the regular BY posters posted that on the Seton Hall board. Once it all becomes clear in your mind what was going on then you can ask him.
 
FriarJ said:
Age catches up to all of us, myself included, so I’m not going to make fun of you. One of the regular BY posters posted that on the Seton Hall board. Once it all becomes clear in your mind what was going on then you can ask him.
Expand ...

I would think it was age if you had answered my question. Surprise, you didn't. So I'll try again. You linked to something. Do you understand the point of what you linked to, and if so would you mind sharing the post, or were you just trying to prove that an infinite amount of monkeys on an infinite amount of typewriters (let me know if you need an old guy to explain what those are) would eventually recreate the entire works of Shakespeare?
 
HuskyHawk said:
It's more about fans than winning, but winning is what we need for fans. Nobody believes me, but I think some of these football focused schools really want a "culture of football". It's not just what we put on the field. What are our traditions on game day? We scoff at this stuff, but it matters to them.

The Rent was fine for our needs but a generic stadium on an airfield didn't really help establish that culture.
Expand ...
I believe football success attracts fans which attracts P5 interest not P5 interest attracts fans and leads to football success.

The G5 schools that have gotten P5 invites all were winning: TCU/Utah/UCF/Houston/Cincinnati. P5 schools can move conferences even without winning football.

As for the Rent, yes, not ideal location, but when UConn football was competitive, the fans showed up and the atmosphere was great. Tailgating is readily accessible next to the stadium.

Bottom line, UConn football needs to figure out a LT winning model to bring back the fans to gain a P5 invite.
 
businesslawyer said:
I would think it was age if you had answered my question. Surprise, you didn't. So I'll try again. You linked to something. Do you understand the point of what you linked to, and if so would you mind sharing the post, or were you just trying to prove that an infinite amount of monkeys on an infinite amount of typewriters (let me know if you need an old guy to explain what those are) would eventually recreate the entire works of Shakespeare?
Expand ...
Okay, go read the thread and figure it out. I can’t help you if you don’t want to help yourself. I didn’t care what the friggin link said that I posted. The posting of it was about something completely different. Hopefully you have good paralegals and associates to explain things to you at your firm. Hint: CL82 and I have a bit of a dance we do, all in good fun.
 
.-.
FriarJ said:
Okay, go read the thread and figure it out. I can’t help you if you don’t want to help yourself. I didn’t care what the friggin link said that I posted. The posting of it was about something completely different. Hopefully you have good paralegals and associates to explain things to you at your firm. Hint: CL82 and I have a bit of a dance we do, all in good fun.
Expand ...
Sorry. I'm not taking this personally. But the linked article itself is worthless because it uses words without setting forth what they mean. And read a thread from Seton Hall fans? I think not.
 
businesslawyer said:
Sorry. I'm not taking this personally. But the linked article itself is worthless because it uses words without setting forth what they mean. And read a thread from Seton Hall fans? I think not.
Expand ...
Hint: the thread was started by a boneyard poster on their site. That’s actually the point of all this silliness.
 
FriarJ said:
Hint: the thread was started by a boneyard poster on their site. That’s actually the point of all this silliness.
Expand ...
Lol, why is that so upsetting to you? Is it because I called you out for posting as CornyT on that site? (I mean, if I was posting as Ernie D on other teams boards, you might just have something. That would be embarrassing, and a little odd.)

I have to laugh about the amount of realty I occupy in your head FriarWest!
 
businesslawyer said:
Sorry. I'm not taking this personally. But the linked article itself is worthless because it uses words without setting forth what they mean.
Expand ...
Hey Biz, I'm just seeing these. Let me take a shot at answering them to the best that I can.

The original graphic is from a tweet by Storrs South. As you point out, the terms are undefined. As you probably know, the term "brand value" is it a measure of which people perceive a particular item. In essence you net out the positive reactions and the negative reactions and you come up with a "brand value" figure. This particular metric is labeled as "TV brand value" so, it would appear to be a metric defining the way TV viewers view Connecticut in the Big East. Clearly, it's not "ratings" alone, otherwise Nielsen would use that term. So, my best guess is that the "TV brand value" metric, is a comparison of how Connecticut, in particular, and the Big East in general, are perceived versus other competing sports viewing alternatives. But that's just speculation on my part, assigning reasonable definitions to the words provided.

Sure, it would be helpful to have a detailed description of how the "TV brand value" metric is derived, but as with most things found on Twitter, there aren't a whole lot of descriptive footnotes. If you decide you're curious and want to Google it, feel free to post it here. I would be interested in seeing what the details of the metric actually are.
 
The primary reason we keep getting passed over is because we keep getting passed over. We have to do what we can to change that narrative, and winning in hoops isn't enough. I would offer to join the ACC at Big East money for 3 years with a full share after that. That will give us enough time to become a stronger candidate for poaching when the ACC GOR ends.
 
.-.
CL82 said:
Lol, why is that so upsetting to you? Is it because I called you out for posting as CornyT on that site? (I mean, if I was posting as Ernie D on other teams boards, you might just have something. That would be embarrassing, and a little odd.)

I have to laugh about the amount of realty I occupy in your head FriarWest!
Expand ...
Please, it’s certainly not upsetting to me, I couldn’t care less what you do and where you do it. Hypocrisy now of you blathering on about my posting here while actually starting threads on another teams board is something that will draw a response. I’m letting it drop, just mind your own damn business for a bit.

-CornyT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
264
Guests online
5,425
Total visitors
5,689
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
165,995
Messages
4,462,994
Members
10,336
Latest member
Wccurrie


Top Bottom