Non-Key Discussion

[GG]

Setting aside it was 7:19 PM ET, could be ...

What do those emojis mean?

 

[SAMCRO]

Setting aside it was 7:19 PM ET, could be ...

In California, it was 4:19 (he was few seconds early). It's like New Years eve, everyone celebrates 4:20 across the different time zones.

 

[jostar1]

What do those emojis mean?

〽️ Part Alternation Mark
Used in traditional Japanese music such as Noh or Renga, to indicate the start of a song. More specifically, the part alternation mark is displayed where the singer’s part begins.

This symbol looks sort of like a lopsided capital M; or a rollercoaster track showing a dip, and then a drop off to the right.

Also Known As

• 〽️ M Emoji
• 〽️ McDonald’s Emoji

Smiling Face With Halo
A face with a halo above it, used to represent an angel, or a good person / person who has done a good deed.

• Also Known As
  • Angel Emoji
  • Halo Emoji

 

[mavblues]

The West Coast ain't jack sh|t in terms of being hard to be a Husky fan; add another 20+ hour time difference and it becomes challenging.

So you're us, but from the future?

You just blew my mind.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

So you're us, but from the future. You just blew my mind.

Or, your mind was previously blown. Think AUS, NZ, Pacific islands, east Asia, and other places far ahead of the ET zone.

 

[mavblues]

Or, your mind was previously blown. Think AUS, NZ, Pacific islands, east Asia, and other places far ahead of the ET zone.

Now you're just making stuff up.

There no "Zealand", so how can they're be a New Zealand"?

(drops mic)

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Now you're just making stuff up. There no "Zealand", so how can they're be a New Zealand"?

Ah, but there was and is indeed a Zeeland and the first arriving Europeans in NZ named it Nova Zeelandia after their Dutch province. No shocker, later arriving James Cook anglicised the name. Bah dah dum!

 

[UConnTrumbull]

Ah, but there was and is indeed a Zeeland and the first arriving Europeans in NZ named it Nova Zeelandia after their Danish province. No shocker, later arriving James Cook anglicised the name. Bah dah dum!

FIFY

 

[HuskyBandDad]

Ah, but there was and is indeed a Zeeland and the first arriving Europeans in NZ named it Nova Zeelandia after their Dutch province. No shocker, later arriving James Cook anglicised the name. Bah dah dum!

I learn something new everyday on the boneyard.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

FIFY

Way way OT before returning to non-key BSing: Perhaps Leif Ericson and other Danish discovered North America, but the Maori, other Kiwis, and historians alike would be shocked to learn Danish explorers were the first Europeans in NZ. Re-checking to reconfirm recollections from Kiwi friends and museums in NZ, 17th century Dutch explorers / traders captained by Abel Tasman still set foot first in Nieuw Zeeland or Nova Zeelandia (renamed by later arriving James Cook in the 18th century).

Along with Dutch East India Company explorers discovering and colonising the Indonesian archipelago and Banten/Batavia (Jakarta) in the 16th C, Henry Hudson, another Dutch-funded explorer, albeit English, found a river and big bay in search of a new route to Asia, contributed to a big city (New Amsterdam), and Dutch associates sailed up the long and winding tidal river (Connecticut), set up shop in the Nutmeg State, and found an island off of CT and RI (Block).

By the 17th C, the Dutch led global commerce (sugar, tea, coffee, rice, rubber, tobacco, silk, porcelain, textiles, pepper, cinnamon, cloves, and alas, nutmeg). They colonized New Zealand, Fiji, other south Pacific islands, Van Deiman's Island (aka Tasmania, named after Abel Tasman) as well as establishing trading in Malaysia, the Malacca Strait, current Thailand, current Taiwan (Formosa), India, Sri Lanka, current Iran (Persia), South Africa, Namibia, St. Maarten, Aruba, Curacao, other Caribbean islands, etc.

Enterprising buggers, those Dutch. Maybe UConn's equally enterprising conference realignment explorers will land us in a conference with better upside. And, back to non-key CR discussion ...

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

I've been waiting for Flug to comment on Fox streaming. Their streaming product is complete garbage.

Could be, but Flug could correctly raise the possibility the state of streaming technology is not inert. If Fox's current streaming product is complete garbage, they'll likely enhance it B1G time.

 

[whaler11]

Could be, but Flug could correctly raise the possibility the state of streaming technology is not inert. If Fox's current streaming product is complete garbage, they'll likely enhance it B1G time.

Maybe - or they might not be the streaming solution - which would make a lot more sense.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

The PAC 12 will always be fine because there are enough athletes in their neck of the woods that they don't have to share to have quality teams.

Not so directly related to UConn getting off of the AAC island, but here's some interesting PAC-12 media discussion from Feb '16 (pre-B1G elephant contract) and Pac-12's TV initiative in China and Asia, Pac-12 Global. Nothing like a B1G-time contract, but outreach to ship loads of people and similar availability.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

Not so directly related to UConn getting off of the AAC island, but here's some interesting PAC-12 media discussion from Feb '16 (pre-B1G elephant contract) and Pac-12's TV initiative in China and Asia, Pac-12 Global. Nothing like a B1G-time contract, but outreach to ship loads of people and similar availability.

UCONN needs to do what PAC-12 is doing and promote the school worldwide. China and Asia are great places to start. PAC-12 is safe due to location. I can see PAC-12 attempt to attract OU and Texas again just to expand the network footprint. If they can get B1G dollars with Texas and OU, they can make it work.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

The B1G can add just about who ever they want. And it won't be a school that isn't already AAU. So, Okla is out. They'll go SEC or Pac eventually.

By that rule, Free Shoes U's out as well. However, it's also unlikely the SEC or the Pac-12 would take them either.

 

[CoastAtlantic]

MSMoose

http:// cincinnati.247sports.com / Board /39/ Contents /Swingtime-April-2016-Expansion-Thread-44593086?Page=15#M45018055

Unless ESPN and Fox Sports come to some miracle agreement (not looking good), a B12 Network and expansion are dead.Texas has too much power here to play the cards;

First, Texas has the lucrative Longhorn Network and ESPN.
Second, Texas receives a larger portion of B12 revenue annually than other members.
Third, Texas has an out to the ACC, in a Notre Dame type agreement.

Texas, is not using its power position to push ESPN forward, rather they are sitting back and doing as ESPN wants.

Unless something changes, I see a major unraveling of the B12 coming. Many B12 schools have safe harbors, West Virginia to the ACC, Oklahoma and Kansas to the Big 10, and Iowa State and Texas Tech (maybe more) to the PAC 12 (assuming PAC 12 sells network to Fox Sports).

ESPN and Fox Sports would both benefit greatly if the B12 dissolves. Fox Sports can buy into the PAC 12 Network and utilize its regional networks for distribution (they own the majority of B12 rd tier rights now). ESPN would increase the market share of the Longhorn Network, while using it to piggyback a new ACC Network.

By the way, it appears a team of CBS\NBS\ and Turner may take the 2nd half of the Big Ten rights deal. ESPN still has not bid, I am told. Fox Sports appears poised to outbid all for the B10 CCG.


This is similar to the scenario that He1nousOne put out at another message board. He also had KU/OU to Big Ten and Texsa to ACC as a semi-independent.

 

[pj]

How does West Virginia have a safe harbor in the ACC? Who would be their partner?

Maybe if Texas has a ND-like deal with the ACC, Texas balances ND and ACC could bring in two full members.

 

[dwalks93]

Unless something changes, I see a major unraveling of the B12 coming. Many B12 schools have safe harbors, West Virginia to the ACC, Oklahoma and Kansas to the Big 10, and Iowa State and Texas Tech (maybe more) to the PAC 12 (assuming PAC 12 sells network to Fox Sports).

I am just not seeing this...if you are a Big12 program not named UT, OU or, to a much lesser extend, KU and Okie St, how can you feel comfortable knowing you'll have a safe landing place if the B12 explodes? Even OU and KU, which are decent candidates for the BIG, are not absolute locks. If I was the BIG I would much prefer UT, ND, and UNC (perhaps even UVa) before OU or KU.

IMO the program with the least amount of options is WVU. At least the other B12 programs may have opportunities with the PAC but WVU is an east coast program whose best potential option is the ACC. I just do not see WVU being a prime candidate for either the SEC or BIG. Saying the ACC is a "safe harbor" for WVU is akin to saying UConn is a lock for the ACC. Both UConn and WVU have been passed over by the ACC yet suddenly WVU is a given? Don't get me wrong I believe both UConn and WVU should be in the ACC but we've already seen the ACC is incapable of strategic business decisions when it comes to conference realignment. If it comes down to UConn or WVU for the ACC I like UConn's chances.

The quickest way to insure the complete destruction of the current ACC is to start passing out more sweet heart deals. We've all seen what ND did to the old BE and now the ACC is falling into the same trap. Offering UT a similar deal to ND would only insure the ACC ship takes on water even faster. The ACC already has programs like FSU who feel they aren't getting their due influence and proceeds. Make FSU an official second class financial citizen and watch what happens. Ironically, despite FSU's vocal outcry, they may be a successful football program which no other conference wants (I guess we will see if the BIG lowers its prior admission standards to select FSU). But there is no way a program like UNC is going to play 3rd fiddle to UT and ND when they could make twice the money in the BIG/SEC. I suppose the "new" ACC could end up with semi-independent UT/ND anchors taking way more than anyone else and the rest of the programs who can't get offers into the BIG/SEC being stuck with accepting an unequal partnership.

It sounds like OU and UT are fully preparing their eventual Big12 exit strategies and certainly they will end up ok. In the interim they are spreading the B12 propaganda that "everyone in the B12 will be fine." The reality is a lot of programs won't be fine and they will later look back on the upcoming expansion vote and wonder why they listened to UT/OU. It is lot easier to accept bad advice from people one views as a "friend" but sadly there are no friends when it comes to conference realignment.

 

[jostar1]

This is similar to the scenario that He1nousOne put out at another message board. He also had KU/OU to Big Ten and Texsa to ACC as a semi-independent.

He1nousOne says that UConn is going to end up in the ACC.

 

[dayooper]

He1nousOne says that UConn is going to end up in the ACC.

That's as accurate as TheDudeofWVU saying WVU has a spot in the SEC waiting for them.

UConn could actually be landing in the ACC and would be a good fit (would be a better fit in the Big10, though), but not because Heinous1 says so. That guy is as knowledgeable as The Dude.

 

[Seaa Blue]

All depends on if the Big 12 starts to unravel first, or if the Big Ten is looking East and is content to wait out the ACC GoR.

Either way I think Delany wants UConn, but a +6 can be drawn up without UConn if ND or FSU are in play, or if there are 2 teams from Texas that want in.

 

[CallMeBruce]

All depends on if the Big 12 starts to unravel first, or if the Big Ten is looking East and is content to wait out the ACC GoR.

Either way I think Delany wants UConn, but a +6 can be drawn up without UConn if ND or FSU are in play, or if there are 2 teams from Texas that want in.

There's only one team in Texas that the Big Ten would have any interest in.

 

[Seaa Blue]

There's only one team in Texas that the Big Ten would have any interest in.

Texas A&M (shhhh...)

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Texas A&M (shhhh...)

Want, for the B1G, and A&M interest may be a wee bit different. The Aggies found, and likely are quite happy with their pot of gold.

 

[Seaa Blue]

Want, for the B1G, and A&M interest may be a wee bit different. The Aggies found, and likely are quite happy with their pot of gold.

There could be interest/pressure to get the UT and aTm band back together.

That, and ESPN has a cash problem with LHN. B1G has cash, and could hammer out a deal to ESPN's liking. It's a long shot.

 

[Charley Horse]

MSMoose

http:// cincinnati. / Board /39/ Contents /Swingtime-April-2016-Expansion-Thread-44593086?Page=15#M45018055

Unless ESPN and Fox Sports come to some miracle agreement (not looking good), a B12 Network and expansion are dead.Texas has too much power here to play the cards;

First, Texas has the lucrative Longhorn Network and ESPN.
Second, Texas receives a larger portion of B12 revenue annually than other members.
Third, Texas has an out to the ACC, in a Notre Dame type agreement.

Texas, is not using its power position to push ESPN forward, rather they are sitting back and doing as ESPN wants.

Unless something changes, I see a major unraveling of the B12 coming. Many B12 schools have safe harbors, West Virginia to the ACC, Oklahoma and Kansas to the Big 10, and Iowa State and Texas Tech (maybe more) to the PAC 12 (assuming PAC 12 sells network to Fox Sports).

ESPN and Fox Sports would both benefit greatly if the B12 dissolves. Fox Sports can buy into the PAC 12 Network and utilize its regional networks for distribution (they own the majority of B12 rd tier rights now). ESPN would increase the market share of the Longhorn Network, while using it to piggyback a new ACC Network.

By the way, it appears a team of CBS\NBS\ and Turner may take the 2nd half of the Big Ten rights deal. ESPN still has not bid, I am told. Fox Sports appears poised to outbid all for the B10 CCG.


This is similar to the scenario that He1nousOne put out at another message board. He also had KU/OU to Big Ten and Texsa to ACC as a semi-independent.

This MSMoose you quote, CoastAtlantic, writes authoritatively but aside from the dubious assumption dwalks 93 pointed out about "safe harbors," MSMoose also loses some credibility for a couple of factual inaccuracies as well.

Texas does not receive a larger portion of B12 revenue annually than other members. The Big 12 distributes revenue evenly except for new members like TCU and WVU who initially take lesser payouts.

And Fox Sports does not own the majority of 3rd Tier rights. Fox Sports owns 2nd Tier rights behind ESPN's 1st Tier rights. Each Big 12 school owns their own 3rd Tier rights.

I also tend to question a few of MSMoose's other assumptions as well. While it's possible ESPN and Fox Sports could both benefit greatly from the Big 12 dissolving, that's a complete 180 from 2010 when they both played a very large role in keeping the Big 12 together. And while I suppose it's possible Fox Sports could buy into the Pac-12 network, one of the Pac-12 network's badges of pride has been its independence from outside companies. And while I suppose it's possible that Texas has a Notre Dame type agreement with the ACC, I really doubt that too.

 

[Adios]

Iowa State to the Pac-12??? WT(beep)?!?!

 

[CoastAtlantic]

More from MSMoose: http:// cincinnati.247sports.com /Reply / MSMoose-Reply-45053367

Provided to me this A.M.. I am only posting the top 3 on the list, as list is rather lengthy.

FBS Analytics (April 14, 2016)
Big 12:
Core Academic Rating 117 (High 175 – Low 52)
R&D (2 members top 50)
Core Ath. Budget 25th (High 47 – Low 2)
Core Endowment 95th (High 177 – Low 2)
Core DMA 67th (High 144 – Low 5)
DMA subscribers avg. 2.4 mil. (High 8.3 mil. – Low 543k)

Candidates:
Cincinnati
Academic Rating 140th – (+23)
R&D 50th – (0)
Ath. Budget 54th – (+29 (subsidy 42.9 mil.))
Endowment 78th – (- 17)
DMA – 36th – (-29)
DMA Avg. subscribers avg. 3 mil. – (- .57 mil.)
Connecticut (Score)
Academic Rating 57thth – (-60)
R&D –(Non-Top 50)
Ath. Budget 48th – (+23 (subsidy 36.8 mil.))
Endowment 211th – (+ 116)
DMA – 30th – (-37)
DMA Avg. subscribers avg. 3.45 mil. – (-1.05 mil.)
South Florida
Academic Rating 156thth – (+ 39)
R&D 41st – (0)
Ath. Budget 59th – (+34 (subsidy 46.8 mil.))
Endowment 195h – (+ 100)
DMA – 11th – (-56)
DMA Avg. subscribers avg. 3.4 mil. – (-1.00 mil.)

Ironic folks do not talk much about USF, mostly due to lack of on field success, and the use of non-university facilities. However, looking at the above one can see why Texas scheduled USF in future non-conference play, very valuable market!

Cincinnati and USF bring top 50 R&D to the table, that no other candidates bring, which is very valuable to voting Presidents. Cincinnati and UCONN are clear favorites, based on the analysis.

Per my colleagues, Texas covets the Florida market, however no one in B12 wants a member geographically defeated which USF would be. Their is not support in the analysis for a combination of USF and UCF. Surprisingly, Temple looks good, but also faces similar perceptions as USF does.

For those BYU lovers in the press, BYU challenges the three candidates above in Academic Rating, Endowment, and Athletic Budget, but not in DMA, DMA subscribers or R&D. Keep in mind though BYU has a national reach, others don't.

 

[upstater]

More from MSMoose: http:// cincinnati. /Reply / MSMoose-Reply-45053367

Provided to me this A.M.. I am only posting the top 3 on the list, as list is rather lengthy.

FBS Analytics (April 14, 2016)
Big 12:
Core Academic Rating 117 (High 175 – Low 52)
R&D (2 members top 50)
Core Ath. Budget 25th (High 47 – Low 2)
Core Endowment 95th (High 177 – Low 2)
Core DMA 67th (High 144 – Low 5)
DMA subscribers avg. 2.4 mil. (High 8.3 mil. – Low 543k)

Candidates:
Cincinnati
Academic Rating 140th – (+23)
R&D 50th – (0)
Ath. Budget 54th – (+29 (subsidy 42.9 mil.))
Endowment 78th – (- 17)
DMA – 36th – (-29)
DMA Avg. subscribers avg. 3 mil. – (- .57 mil.)
Connecticut (Score)
Academic Rating 57thth – (-60)
R&D –(Non-Top 50)
Ath. Budget 48th – (+23 (subsidy 36.8 mil.))
Endowment 211th – (+ 116)
DMA – 30th – (-37)
DMA Avg. subscribers avg. 3.45 mil. – (-1.05 mil.)
South Florida
Academic Rating 156thth – (+ 39)
R&D 41st – (0)
Ath. Budget 59th – (+34 (subsidy 46.8 mil.))
Endowment 195h – (+ 100)
DMA – 11th – (-56)
DMA Avg. subscribers avg. 3.4 mil. – (-1.00 mil.)

Ironic folks do not talk much about USF, mostly due to lack of on field success, and the use of non-university facilities. However, looking at the above one can see why Texas scheduled USF in future non-conference play, very valuable market!

Cincinnati and USF bring top 50 R&D to the table, that no other candidates bring, which is very valuable to voting Presidents. Cincinnati and UCONN are clear favorites, based on the analysis.

Per my colleagues, Texas covets the Florida market, however no one in B12 wants a member geographically defeated which USF would be. Their is not support in the analysis for a combination of USF and UCF. Surprisingly, Temple looks good, but also faces similar perceptions as USF does.

For those BYU lovers in the press, BYU challenges the three candidates above in Academic Rating, Endowment, and Athletic Budget, but not in DMA, DMA subscribers or R&D. Keep in mind though BYU has a national reach, others don't.

How is DMA 30th for UConn? Take a look at the state. UConn is not = Hartford. UConn = Connecticut. This is the equivalent of saying Penn State's DMA = Philadelphia.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

When Gee was president of Ohio State he was quite pompous, now that he's resumed the position of president of West Virginia University it's kind of difficult to be present that front.