Non-Key Tweets | Page 897 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

Reducing the number of college teams to an elite few probably won’t work. I won’t watch, nor will millions of others. If you aren’t in on the dream of a natty, you won’t care. Those that do care will be fans of the chosen 30 schools or pathetic gamblers.

The average CFL team would crush Bama or Ohio St. It isn’t great football that brings fans, it’s the mass of schools and their alums. If they kill it, I’ll just watch the NFL and move on. I tell my buddies this and they either agree with me or they gamble way too much.
 
buddy said:
Actually, not true. Most newspapers have digital editions on the internet. The journalists are still there, but they have been significantly reduced once private equity took over.
Expand ...
Not true. The digital concept is the next evolution of newspapers but the profitability is minimal.
But the margins on digital are pennies vs print. Not even close.
Google, Facebook, etc control much of the marketing dollars now.

The equity you’re talking about was basically buying up distressed assets and liquidating anything of value while trying to maintain cash flows in the near term. This meant cutting costs to offset a 10% top line drop every year. Even so, they could still generate 30% margins on print. Of course this also meant the product was marginalized.

If anything PE keeps the papers going longer than they should have been. The newspapers were already distressed.

Case in point, how long can Burlington Free Press in VT last if the paper is printed in RI. That’s a 4 hour route everyday? That’s just one of many realities facing newspapers. News is two days old before reading about it. Can’t even cover sports.
 
.-.
cellocgg said:
The 18th ACC team

Expand ...

In the picture on the top right, there's a guy on the far left looking at his watch thinking "almost time to screw UConn, let's call no defensive pass interference on Syracuse"...

From the article:
Inside the operations center, 32 screens line two walls. At the front of the room, a 140-square-foot video board displays up to six games at once. Eight workstations, 33 screens, 24 communication lines — and a handful of replay officials obsessed with precision.
Expand ...
A bunch of screens seeing practically everything, yet they miss some key calls...guess the zebras aren't the only blind ones looking at the game. 😉

The impetus for transparency​

Two controversial finishes in Miami victories in 2024 spurred the ACC to make changes, allowing ESPN unprecedented access to their replay reviews this season.

If fans are confused, the ACC figured, why not let them listen in?

ACC Network executive Jeremy Michiaels described the ACC's decision as a "calculated risk to be innovative with the television audience" in an interview earlier this year with The Virginian-Pilot.

"We really have nothing to hide," said ACC football executive Michael Strickland.
Expand ...
Nothing to hide, ohhh, is that why a key on-field official quit after a game involving UConn, cuz of not wanting to hide anything??? Thank you for confirming that in not trying to hide something, you are hiding something that you said is not hidden.
 
Last edited:
CL82 said:
If you accept the logic of that and follow it to its logical conclusion, it means that the end game of this process will be to cull the weak teams out of the valuable conferences.
Expand ...
If you cull out the weak teams, someone else will become a weak team or everyone will be .500. You can't have all great teams, at least based on conference record. You need the BCs of the world to perpetually deliver Ws to the conference big dogs.
 
Fairfield_1st said:
If you cull out the weak teams, someone else will become a weak team or everyone will be .500. You can't have all great teams, at least based on conference record. You need the BCs of the world to perpetually deliver Ws to the conference big dogs.
Expand ...
That may be true, but will the weak teams stay when they are no longer making mega bucks? The BC's of the world will no longer be parasites of the big conference money. Will they be able then to sustain being in such a conference? We are seeing unequal revenue sharing beginning. Once private equity takes over, the BC's of the world are finished.
 
buddy said:
That may be true, but will the weak teams stay when they are no longer making mega bucks?
Expand ...
Even with unequal distribution, do you think a parasite/doormat BC will still make more than UConn in the BE/Independent? I assume they will, though without seeing numbers that is just a guess. It may not be mega bucks, but it should still be pretty good bucks for BC.
 
.-.
Fairfield_1st said:
If you cull out the weak teams, someone else will become a weak team or everyone will be .500. You can't have all great teams, at least based on conference record. You need the BCs of the world to perpetually deliver Ws to the conference big dogs.
Expand ...
That's a fair point. The question is do you need to pay them the same amount that you pay the big dogs for them to come in and be the Washington senators. An alternative model would have a smaller conference of quality schools with more out of conference games. That way, the big dogs get the big bucks and essentially fill the rest of the schedule with buy games.
 
Last edited:
CL82 said:
That's a fair point. The question is do you need to pay them the same amount that you pay the big dogs for them to come in and be the Washington senators. An alternative model would have a smaller conference of quality schools with more out of conference games. That way, the big dogs get the big bucks and essentially fill the rest of the schedule with buy games.
Expand ...
This is what they are choosing to do. A bigger conference stacked with the best programs. It doesn't take a doctorate from MIT to figure out that they'll have an average or below average record some years. The bottom feeders should get paid the same but I'm sure they'll eventually accept a reduced payout to dance to Sweet Georgia Brown. The Generals....
 
CL82 said:
...An alternative model would have a smaller conference of quality schools with more out of conference games...
Expand ...
And that's what we had in the 80's and 90's, and that sure made for some fun football.
 
CL82 said:
That's a fair point. The question is do you need to pay them the same amount that you pay the big dogs for them to come in and be the Washington senators. An alternative model would have a smaller conference of quality schools with more out of conference games. That way, the big dogs get the big bucks and essentially fill the rest of the schedule with buy games.
Expand ...
Maybe it should be performance based after the fact. Just look at FSU. They're getting extra dough, right? Now they're pooping the bed and not worth it. Nobody is on top forever.
 
Hoophound said:
Reducing the number of college teams to an elite few probably won’t work. I won’t watch, nor will millions of others. If you aren’t in on the dream of a natty, you won’t care. Those that do care will be fans of the chosen 30 schools or pathetic gamblers.

The average CFL team would crush Bama or Ohio St. It isn’t great football that brings fans, it’s the mass of schools and their alums. If they kill it, I’ll just watch the NFL and move on. I tell my buddies this and they either agree with me or they gamble way too much.
Expand ...
100%.

Allegiance drives college sports, not the entertainment factor. The NFL offers better athletes with a higher game IQ, and delivers a better product. There is a reason NYD6 bowl games are played on Saturday or Monday, when New Years falls on Sunday. The NFL would crush college ratings. The Jets are 0-7 and comparatively terrible, but they would destroy Ohio State, Miami, or whoever is #1 this week.
 
.-.
For anyone who believes MHver has any credibility:

I can get you in on the ground floor of a new crypto currency that will make you rich in a few years. Cash only, small unmarked bills, minimum buy-in is $10,000 but it will be well worth it.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
For anyone who believes MHver has any credibility:

I can get you in on the ground floor of a new crypto currency that will make you rich in a few years. Cash only, small unmarked bills, minimum buy-in is $10,000 but it will be well worth it.
Expand ...
I dont see why the SEC would have any interest in Clemson, nor the B1G in Stanford.
 
.-.
FfldCntyFan said:
For anyone who believes MHver has any credibility:

I can get you in on the ground floor of a new crypto currency that will make you rich in a few years. Cash only, small unmarked bills, minimum buy-in is $10,000 but it will be well worth it.
Expand ...
A lot of decent people have wasted a considerable amount of their lives hanging on these characters' every word with bated breath, hoping against hope that the hopeless will eventually come to pass.

It might, but not because one of these wannabe keyboard warriors has any inside dope.
 
Last edited:
Vowelguy said:
I dont see why the SEC would have any interest in Clemson, nor the B1G in Stanford.
Expand ...
Honestly, I don't think anyone else has an interest in Duke, which goes to the point that basketball success really doesn't matter.
 
CL82 said:
Honestly, I don't think anyone else has an interest in Duke, which goes to the point that basketball success really doesn't matter.
Expand ...
Bingo GIF by Hawkeye
 
Vowelguy said:
I dont see why the SEC would have any interest in Clemson, nor the B1G in Stanford.
Expand ...
Acknowledging the UGA football brand already in the SEC, possibly UNC hoop brand very evident in the Palmetto State along with USC, media and advertising decision makers may still like Clemson’s recent decades gridiron image despite the Tigers’ declining success.

Stanford and B1G? Accommodating ND and B1G academic administrators, further B1G academic consortium Silicon Valley access and dinero? Athletics? Not football nor hoops success lately, IDK, overall athletic program annual success? Otherwise, no friggin clue.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,944
Messages
4,545,825
Members
10,428
Latest member
CarloPFF


Top Bottom