Non-Key Tweets | Page 548 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

CallMeBruce said:
I'll eat my hat if UT and Kansas prefer BYU to UConn. He's so full of it.
Expand ...


Was going to say the thing same last night. I think the news on expansion is that there is likely no expansion and that is why UConn is deflated. I have reason to believe whether through a network or alternative forms of revenue generation such as streaming, UConn is going to generate more money than the other schools. We have the fans, the brand and the market. Apparently, something happened that made expansion less appealing. I am certain UConn not pulling its own weight was not the reason. Anyone against UConn joining isn't against it because of anything we can really fix. It is due to politics, football tradition or location. Given the powerful basketball programs and the fact that we appear to be coming back to life in football, intelligent people would see the forest through the trees. Something is happening with the powers in the Big 12.
 
Our hope now seems to rest on Swofford delivering whatever FSU and Clemson need to be happy and for that message to become public. Even then, the B12 will probably opt to add two now (Cincy and not us) and ride out to 2025 to see what shakes loose.
 
Exit 4 said:
Our hope now seems to rest on Swofford delivering whatever FSU and Clemson need to be happy and for that message to become public. Even then, the B12 will probably opt to add two now (Cincy and not us) and ride out to 2025 to see what shakes loose.
Expand ...

P5 fantasy post is more realistic than posting about actual ways to generate more revenue?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
P5 fantasy post is more realistic than posting about actual ways to generate more revenue?
Expand ...

Getting to the P5 is the only way to generate enough revenue, long term, and to ensure the kind of profile that our leaders want. Period. End of story.

Yes, we can try to get a better deal out of the American in three years, reclaim T3 rights, or threaten to go to the Big East, but those aren't solutions. Those are concessions to defeat. So those cannot be the primary focus. That's what we do when everything else fails.
 
HuskyHawk said:
Someone connected to KU posted a month ago that KU favors expansion as long as it includes "a team that wears blue and plays basketball". So this is in direct conflict.
Expand ...
Technically, BYU wears blue and plays basketball.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
MH ver3 ‏@MH ver3 17m17 minutes ago
The Texas trio and Kansas are against Uconn while OU/OKST/Baylor/WVU are against BYU.
Expand ...

I don't see that.

Kansas is a basketball school. Why wouldn't they welcome another basketball school?

TCU is a church school. The only people who hate church schools more than non-church schools are other church schools.

And Texas, I can see three reasons why they wouldn't want BYU. Texas has had bad experiences with church schools, Texas values its baseball team and likes to spread three game series out all weekend, and if AD Mike Perrin bitched about having to go to West Virginia, imagine how he'll bitch about having to go to West Virginia and Utah.

Unfortunately, I'm also getting the impression that as the Big 12 shifts its focus away from a traditional network to more of a streaming PPV type set up, the criteria shifts as well and probably away from television markets - which could hurt UConn's chances.
 
Charley Horse said:
I don't see that.

Kansas is a basketball school. Why wouldn't they welcome another basketball school?

TCU is a church school. The only people who hate church schools more than non-church schools are other church schools.

And Texas, I can see three reasons why they wouldn't want BYU. Texas has had bad experiences with church schools, Texas values its baseball team and likes to spread three game series out all weekend, and if AD Mike Perrin bitched about having to go to West Virginia, imagine how he'll bitch about having to go to West Virginia and Utah.

Unfortunately, I'm also getting the impression that as the Big 12 shifts its focus away from a traditional network to more of a streaming PPV type set up, the criteria shifts as well and probably away from television markets - which could hurt UConn's chances.
Expand ...


No other program will sell streaming like UConn will. Streaming or network, UConn has a lot of people willing to pay. Why bring in schools that won't bring paying customers?
 
Charley Horse said:
Unfortunately, I'm also getting the impression that as the Big 12 shifts its focus away from a traditional network to more of a streaming PPV type set up, the criteria shifts as well and probably away from television markets - which could hurt UConn's chances.
Expand ...
Or does it improve them? UConn gets burned a little under the traditional DMA analysis because about million Connecticut residents live in Fairfield County, which is part of the NYC DMA. Now all of Connecticut's 3.59 million residents should be considered a potential asset of the school, particularly since their are no other P5 programs in the state.

Think that UConn doesn't have that kind of drawing power within the state? Well for years SNY (Sports New York - the Met's station) was trying gain a foothold in Connecticut. Once they became the primary broadcaster for the UConn woman's basketball team, virtually every cable company put them on the first tier line up within a matter of months.
 
Last edited:
Hoophound said:
No other program will sell streaming like UConn will. Streaming or network, UConn has a lot of people willing to pay. Why bring in schools that won't bring paying customers?
Expand ...

No argument from me. I see the correlation. Good tv market = lots of potential viewers. Lots of potential viewers = likely streaming subscribers.

Unfortunately, I don't make the decisions like the school presidents and I don't write the narrative that sways public opinion like the mediots do. And while the former possibly grasps the correlation, the latter is barking up another tree.

The impression in Big 12 country is that the change in 3rd tier packaging moved the candidates from Cincy and UConn (and possibly UCF) to Cincy and Houston (and possibly BYU - a lot of people won't let that one die.

:-(
 
So... if a 'non-traditional' network i.e. streaming is the new thing... do they still have to sell advertisements? Is eyeballs even a thing still? (lol at that sentence structure) Or... will the B12N charge ISPs a dollar per household, or something?
 
junglehusky said:
So... if a 'non-traditional' network i.e. streaming is the new thing... do they still have to sell advertisements? Is eyeballs even a thing still? (lol at that sentence structure) Or... will the B12N charge ISPs a dollar per household, or something?
Expand ...
Maybe the model is like the HBO app that my wife forks over $15 a month to watch game of thrones. Download and app and start watching 30 days at a time. Btw, I'm an MLB audio app subscriber, totally awesome to listen to any game while standing anywhere.
 
Another aspect that shouldn't be overlooked is that Connecticut is one the wealthiest states in the country. Advertisers want to reach consumers with lots of disposable income, and CT residents will shell out whatever it takes to watch their Huskies (just look at the SYN situation).

That should only bode well for UConn.
 
Hoophound said:
No other program will sell streaming like UConn will. Streaming or network, UConn has a lot of people willing to pay. Why bring in schools that won't bring paying customers?
Expand ...

myself included, outside of NFL network/ redzone i don't bother flipping on the TV unless its for Uconn athletics.
 
You don't need inside contacts to understand the Pac 12 network is worthless.

They have been trying to drum up capital and nobody is interested.

As for the alternative Big 12 streaming network it can't be done until the current TV contracts run out - ESPN and Fox can't go over the top on the cable providers due to their carriage contacts. Comcast isn't paying $8 a month per sub so they can be backdoored by ESPN streaming the same games direct to people who don't have cable subs.
 
CoastAtlantic said:
Joshua Lovern ‏@joshualovern87 3h3 hours ago
@MH ver3 Cali Ore and WA schools are on par with big 10 school academically.
Expand ...

Well... except for Wazzou. They kind of sneak in in a crowd of their academic betters and hope nobody notices.

They're one of about 40 P5 schools that have no business being a P5 school and wouldn't meet any criteria to become a P5 school if they were a G5 school now.

And yet a lot of people want to pick nits about certain G5 schools aspiring to be P5 schools.
 
Charley Horse said:
Well... except for Wazzou. They kind of sneak in in a crowd of their academic betters and hope nobody notices.

They're one of about 40 P5 schools that have no business being a P5 school and wouldn't meet any criteria to become a P5 school if they were a G5 school now.

And yet a lot of people want to pick nits about certain G5 schools aspiring to be P5 schools.
Expand ...

Not Oregon. No.

Cali, Stanford, UW, UCLA, USC yes. The Arizonas, Wash St., Utah, Colorado, Oregons, are all more like Nebraska or worse. Otherthan Nebraska, every B12 public would be better than the Pac12s outside the top 5.

My ranking would be:

1. Stanford
2. Cal-Berkeley
3. Michigan
4. UCLA
5. Northwestern
--------------------
6. Washington
7. Penn State
8. Illinois
9. Ohio St.
10. USC
11. Rutgers
12. Wisconsin
13. Minnesota
--------------------
14. Michigan St.
15. Maryland
16. Iowa
17. Indiana
18. Purdue
--------------------
19. Colorado
20. Arizona
21A. Utah
21B. Nebraska
23. Oregon
24. Arizona St.
25. Oregon St.
26. Washington St.

The funny thing is that when I made this list from memory, the only school I forgot to include was Rutgers.
 
whaler11 said:
You don't need inside contacts to understand the Pac 12 network is worthless.

They have been trying to drum up capital and nobody is interested.

As for the alternative Big 12 streaming network it can't be done until the current TV contracts run out - ESPN and Fox can't go over the top on the cable providers due to their carriage contacts. Comcast isn't paying $8 a month per sub so they can be backdoored by ESPN streaming the same games direct to people who don't have cable subs.
Expand ...

It maybe worthless...but it is concievable the PAC 12 bleeds teams in the years ahead? I find that hard to believe, no matter the revenue story. The PAC 12 is just the canary in the coal mine for the tiny B12 footprint 10 years from now as tv viewing/cord cutting spreads.

As for streaming, it will either require a local cable package to access or perhaps they have a premium tier will you pay a super premium price which covers a kick back to the cable company for their lost share of the revenue stream.
 
whaler11 said:
You don't need inside contacts to understand the Pac 12 network is worthless.

They have been trying to drum up capital and nobody is interested.

As for the alternative Big 12 streaming network it can't be done until the current TV contracts run out - ESPN and Fox can't go over the top on the cable providers due to their carriage contacts. Comcast isn't paying $8 a month per sub so they can be backdoored by ESPN streaming the same games direct to people who don't have cable subs.
Expand ...

You keep adding qualifiers to justify your position that seem reasonable, but are really pretty stupid. The Big 12N doesn't need a separate streaming option, yet. But once a network is set up, it will not be hard to switch it over to streaming.

10 years from now technology will have advanced enough that you won't even need ISP's. Wireless services will provide streaming to the home. Depending on broadcast channels for revenue is just flat out stupid.
The leagues and schools that own their content will win, and everyone else will lose. The Pac 12 Network will eventually be very successful for the league, as will every other school and conference network. Or, we could keep fighting for real estate on ESPN Ocho, because that makes sense.
 

Online statistics

Members online
109
Guests online
2,759
Total visitors
2,868
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Share This Page

Forum statistics

Threads
164,256
Messages
4,389,302
Members
10,196
Latest member
Whizzlerr


.
..
Top Bottom