Non-Key Tweets | Page 840 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

HuskyHawk said:
The main difference between the streaming services and cable is in how they are monetized. Subscription vs advertising.
Expand ...
Beginning last year, Netflix moved to an alternative (and cheaper) advertising model--in addition to a straight subscription. The success of that effort has already propelled its stock in one year from $169 to $423. If the Netflix subscribers (which can no longer share passwords--but have not bolted--adding even more revenue to Netflix) continue to embrace the advertising model, it could well pluck more of the advertising spending away from cable and further into streaming. If Netflix continues at this pace, other subscription services will likely adapt as well, taking even more advertising dollars away from cable.
Having said that, please get us into the BIG XII now and we can worry about it later!
 
CTFAN4LIFE said:
Hopefully it wasn't a premium Scotch!!!
Expand ...
This reminds me of something absurd I saw at a rooftop bar last week. They had three levels of drinks. Premium, Super Premium and Ultra Premium. So "Premium" is the bottom shelf stuff. Meanwhile, looking at the bottles, nothing they had was even what a normal person would call "premium".
 
HuskyHawk said:
This reminds me of something absurd I saw at a rooftop bar last week. They had three levels of drinks. Premium, Super Premium and Ultra Premium. So "Premium" is the bottom shelf stuff. Meanwhile, looking at the bottles, nothing they had was even what a normal person would call "premium".
Expand ...
So much for truth in "advertising". Pretty silly approach by that establishment - I think it shows what they think of the customers. SMH.
 
HuskyHawk said:
This reminds me of something absurd I saw at a rooftop bar last week. They had three levels of drinks. Premium, Super Premium and Ultra Premium. So "Premium" is the bottom shelf stuff. Meanwhile, looking at the bottles, nothing they had was even what a normal person would call "premium".
Expand ...

Kinda like feeling good about seeing a boarding pass for an airline, seeing you are in Boarding Group 1, and then slowly realizing you may be the last group to board.
 
CTFAN4LIFE said:
So much for truth in "advertising". Pretty silly approach by that establishment - I think it shows what they think of the customers. SMH.
Expand ...
They're reaching for the same audience that fell for "this one goes to eleven".
DEpuiveUIAAHVb0.jpg
 
dwalks93 said:
I agree…between the ACC, the PAC, and the Big 12, the only conference where all its members seem fully committed to its survival is the Big12. In truth, that is probably because no current Big12 school is likely to garner interests from the BIG10 or SEC so they know it’s ride or die with the Big12.

Our time in the old Big East taught us what happens when some members aren’t committed long term to the league. Seems the current PAC and ACC have those issues and the Big12 doesn’t.
Expand ...

Amen brother, great point!
 
I just want us in the Big12 scheduling every game opposite Rutgers. Not entirely serious, but I do wonder if success on the football field and our continued success in basketball is something is something that would impact the Big10 in any way concerning Northeast market share and media value. Sure it's a minor consideration given their brand identities are schools in other markets. But it seems like an opportunity was wasted once choosing Rutgers. If we do get a B12 offer would the Big10 take any notice?
 
Jimdish255 said:
I just want us in the Big12 scheduling every game opposite Rutgers. Not entirely serious, but I do wonder if success on the football field and our continued success in basketball is something is something that would impact the Big10 in any way concerning Northeast market share and media value. Sure it's a minor consideration given their brand identities are schools in other markets. But it seems like an opportunity was wasted once choosing Rutgers. If we do get a B12 offer would the Big10 take any notice?
Expand ...
If we had success, sure, i would think so. We have seen with our BB we captivate the region. FB has never attained that level, but the closest juggernaut to here is Penn State. If we had a magical season in a P5 league everyone would notice. The transfer portal is real game changer in making something like that possible. You don't need 3 or 4 years to remake rosters anymore.
 
noeynox said:
If we had success, sure, i would think so. We have seen with our BB we captivate the region. FB has never attained that level, but the closest juggernaut to here is Penn State. If we had a magical season in a P5 league everyone would notice. The transfer portal is real game changer in making something like that possible. You don't need 3 or 4 years to remake rosters anymore.
Expand ...
Even more so for football. The big programs used to hoard players and had enough talent on the bench to field a quality team. Most of those kids used to stick it out and hope they get their shot. Not so much anymore. Sitting on the bench at Bama, UGA or Ohio State doesn‘t have the appeal it once did. Most BB teams don‘t have talent that doesn’t play on the roster, but football has loads of it.
 
Serah Williams AIM SHOW@GSw aim · 2h
The #Pac12 isn't going to add #SDSU or #SMU unless they lose teams, so the Aztecs and Mustangs better pray

Serah Williams AIM SHOW@GSw aim · 2h
Once again the #Pac12 will be a very high percentage of streaming and less than $20M (less than half of the #Big12 actual revenue) per team. The P12 is dead, either now or later!!
 
HuskyHawk said:
Even more so for football. The big programs used to hoard players and had enough talent on the bench to field a quality team. Most of those kids used to stick it out and hope they get their shot. Not so much anymore. Sitting on the bench at Bama, UGA or Ohio State doesn‘t have the appeal it once did. Most BB teams don‘t have talent that doesn’t play on the roster, but football has loads of it.
Expand ...
Football use to be worse
The NCAA cut total allowable scholarships to 85 in 1973. Prior to that you could be an All Stater and 5th or 6th string at a top program. I worked for man years ago who son got a football scholarship to Ohio State but never got into a game in four years or probable even dressed for one .
There was no limit and some schools carried up yo 150 football scholarships
Title IX ended that practice
 
AZHuskiePop said:
Football use to be worse
The NCAA cut total allowable scholarships to 85 in 1973. Prior to that you could be an All Stater and 5th or 6th string at a top program. I worked for man years ago who son got a football scholarship to Ohio State but never got into a game in four years or probable even dressed for one .
There was no limit and some schools carried up yo 150 football scholarships
Title IX ended that practice
Expand ...
Did the scholarship limit help??
 
HuskyHawk said:
Yes but they still carry non scholarship kids who could probably be on scholarship elsewhere.
Expand ...
But that’s their choice. Back before 1973, a kid signed a scholarship and he was stuck. At least now the walk-ons know they have an uphill battle to climb.
 
uconnyankee said:
This adds nothing new in terms of what’s out there.
Expand ...

No, but it's a mostly positive article which articulates UConn's draw to the Big12, the concern of football and the UConn fan base's concerns.

If people are going to trot out the same tired arguments against UConn, I'm all for the same positives being put out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Online statistics

Members online
237
Guests online
2,245
Total visitors
2,482
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,073
Messages
4,381,116
Members
10,177
Latest member
silver fox


.
..
Top Bottom