Non-Key Tweets | Page 723 | The Boneyard

Non-Key Tweets

businesslawyer said:
People keep saying that, but why is that in the XII's interest? Let's take a different example. I've decided it will be good for my firm to hire two more litigation partners (notwithstanding that I hate litigators). One of them is immediately available and would bring value to my firm. I have a second one identified who I'm also convinced would bring value, maybe even more than the first, but he's waiting to see if his current firm gives him a big raise and keeps getting stalled when he tries to get an answer. And he keeps stalling me. I also have a backup plan if this second partner won't join me, but the backup plan wouldn't be nearly as valuable as either of the first two options, and maybe I need to do more diligence and make sure I want him.

O.K., now since I'm slow, please explain to me why the uncertainty as to whether I can get the second litigator (and what I would do if the second turns me down) would keep me from hiring the first immediately, since the first one would add value today?
Expand ...
If hiring one or two of these potential litigators would directly impact the work schedules, travel schedules and day to day functions of the entire firm, then you probably do not want to add one until you are sure it’s only one if at all possible. I think the Big XII would prefer two, with one being us, and a second being a PAC team. When they’re sure, they announce the one or two additions, not before.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
BL,

Let's look at your employee example as if the general belief were similar to Switzerland's law on pets where the requirement is that you have to hire in pairs. Would you announce the hiring of one, putting him in position of giving notice now, to start in a few weeks while also waiting at least a month before you can expect an answer from the other candidate, not knowing when, and not being fully confident if he would end up with your firm?

There is no law on this but I imagine that it is pretty safe to say the B-12 would prefer not going through a season with an odd number of members.

I don't know where we stand right now but I don't see how anyone could use that nothing has been announced yet as proof that nothing will be announced.
Expand ...
I have no idea what you are talking about with respect to Switzerland so I'll ignore it. Sorry.

Is it plausible to see why the Big XII would prefer any even number of members? Of course it is. But it has gone througha period with an odd number and, more importantly, the premise I was challenging is THAT UCONN BRINGS VALUE TO THE BIG XII TODAY. Not that UConn would bring value to the Big XII only if without adding us they are stuck on an odd number. So I go back to my original point -- if doing something adds value, you do it. You don't wait for something else that would also add value if it occurs.
 
jostar1 said:
Your first litigator starts working for you immediately. UConn wouldn't start working (playing) for the Big 12 for one (possibly football) or two years. So what value would UConn be adding immediately? Are you talking about, say, public relations value?
Expand ...
I am fairly certain that, by not bringing us in by 6/30, they have to wait one entire full season before they can get us in.
 
Conference Realignment is not analogous to hiring two partners to a firm. The Big XII has. Game plan. Integrate its 4 new members now and then announce additions. The Pac 12 TV contract could have made it easier to pick off Colorado. But it has been delayed again. UConn is part of the Northeast expansion if you believe Yormark. For conferences and universities, it is easier to get all the ducks in a row and then make the announcement. I read a while back that Yormark said the next additions are for the 2031 contract, not the 2026 contract. If we can join early and get pro rata, better for UConn. However, to add value, we need to be a member for a few years and weave that UConn magic.
 
Skiblets said:
I’ll try.

Yormark has 12 ADs, 12 Presidents and hundreds of Trustees and donors he needs to bring along the journey. He’s presented his expansion plans to a subset of them. He’s gotten consensus agreement on that plan from that diverse audience. If the consensus plan is to move on multiple schools then he can’t just go ahead and add us. Not very transformational adding a hoops heavy school.

So if he tried to do that he’d lose all credibility since that’s not the agreed upon plan and the next time he went back to the well he’d get a whole bunch of pushback.
Expand ...
And, there's this little ole issue of pleasing/getting buy in from your media partners on any and all conference additions.
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
Expanding a business is expanding a business. Of course there are differences in any two situations, but again -- if adding a person, member, piece of equipment or anything else brings you value today, why would you not act on it today, but instead put it off until a second thing that adds value can be accomplished?
Expand ...
Lol, c'mon Biz. Your handle is business lawyer. You know there's a huge difference between hiring a couple of people in a private company and the addition of members to association of multiple public entities for which public relations (perception management) is a principal goal. Your analogy is the equivalent of "I go to the store to get milk and eggs, but they're all out of milk. Why should I deny myself eggs?" Not exactly applicable.

[SMH, laughing]
 
CL82 said:
Lol, c'mon Biz. Your handle is business lawyer. You know there's a huge difference between hiring a couple of people in a private company and the addition of members to association of multiple public entities for which public relations (perception management) is a principal goal. Your analogy is the equivalent of "I go to the store to get milk and eggs, but they're all out of milk. Why should I deny myself eggs?" Not exactly applicable.

[SMH, laughing]
Expand ...
That's a fair characterization. And it makes my point. So I'll say this and stop -- if we truly added value to the Big XII, and the Big XII realized that, there is no good reason they wouldn't take us. Among other things, it might make the Four Corner Schools realize that there might only be a spot for 3 of them and they didn't want to be the last one to ask.

I hope we get in. It is in the interests of the university and the athletic department. But this thought that we're worth $50M a year if we're paired with Colorado, but not otherwise, is not rational.
 
businesslawyer said:
That's a fair characterization. And it makes my point. So I'll say this and stop -- if we truly added value to the Big XII, and the Big XII realized that, there is no good reason they wouldn't take us. Among other things, it might make the Four Corner Schools realize that there might only be a spot for 3 of them and they didn't want to be the last one to ask.

I hope we get in. It is in the interests of the university and the athletic department. But this thought that we're worth $50M a year if we're paired with Colorado, but not otherwise, is not rational.
Expand ...
Don’t think anyone is saying that. Think it’s about making a splash and doing so in a way consistent w whatever the agreed upon plan is. Making a one off announcement about adding UConn is clearly not part of that plan which is why nothing has been announced. Doesn’t mean we don’t get in but may mean there’s a broader strategy at play
 
.-.
metsfan2323 said:
Wait until the other B12 fanbases pick up on this, it's powerful fuel for the UConn doesn't fit the culture argument.

BTW how many miles is our Big East basketball team going to travel next year? We should have scheduled UMASS instead of Gonzaga.
Expand ...
Exactly.

If we are stuck on streaming app in 2026 for UConn vs SJU I will know who to add to the blame list. UConn vs Baylor however would probably be on FS1.
 
businesslawyer said:
That's a fair characterization. And it makes my point. So I'll say this and stop -- if we truly added value to the Big XII, and the Big XII realized that, there is no good reason they wouldn't take us. Among other things, it might make the Four Corner Schools realize that there might only be a spot for 3 of them and they didn't want to be the last one to ask.

I hope we get in. It is in the interests of the university and the athletic department. But this thought that we're worth $50M a year if we're paired with Colorado, but not otherwise, is not rational.
Expand ...
Agree, but the only person who's said that we're only worth $50 million if we're paired with Colorado is, well, you. (Strawman argument)

In any event, it'll either happen, or it won't. I'm not spending a whole lot of time worrying about it in the near term.
 
Exit 4 said:
Exactly.

If we are stuck on streaming app in 2026 for UConn vs SJU I will know who to add to the blame list. UConn vs Baylor however would probably be on FS1.
Expand ...

Thanks for the insight, boomer.
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
Thanks for the insight, boomer.
Expand ...
I worry about losing casual fans.....losing non alumni....losing a lot of people that only find college sports when scrolling. Its a big portion of the ratings.

You must not have paid attention to all the talk the last 5+ years about the collective fear of streaming for your respective team. You just ignoring all that fear from the power brokers (owners in pros / ADs in college)? We left the AAC in part because ESPN had designs to bury the WBB on ESPN+.

Its going to be another decade ahead until a streaming game is considered a respectable outlet vs a linear or cable game. Can recruits find your game on tv? It will matter less over time, but we aren't there yet - its still matters right now.
 
Exit 4 said:
I feel like temery posts belong in key tweets. Just saying.
Expand ...
Sucks Tim Robinson GIF by The Lonely Island
 
businesslawyer said:
I am fairly certain that, by not bringing us in by 6/30, they have to wait one entire full season before they can get us in.
Expand ...
We weren't joining for this year, regardless.
 
CL82 said:
We weren't joining for this year, regardless.
Expand ...
Could you stop that? We both know that is not what I said. However many years we have to give the Big East notice before leaving, the period resets every year on July 1. Sheesh.
 
Exit 4 said:
I worry about losing casual fans.....losing non alumni....losing a lot of people that only find college sports when scrolling. Its a big portion of the ratings.

You must not have paid attention to all the talk the last 5+ years about the collective fear of streaming for your respective team. You just ignoring all that fear from the power brokers (owners in pros / ADs in college)? We left the AAC in part because ESPN had designs to bury the WBB on ESPN+.

Its going to be another decade ahead until a streaming game is considered a respectable outlet vs a linear or cable game. Can recruits find your game on tv? It will matter less over time, but we aren't there yet - its still matters right now.
Expand ...
Cable may be the dinosaur of platforms, but it's ubiquitous - you plug this cable into your TV or cable box, go to channel 1234 for your 12 o'clock kick or tip and voila the game is on your big screen TV no muss no fuss. No screwing around with different devices and getting it to work with your particular setup, no worrying about buffering or wondering "what's going on" when it's 12:02 and you still got nothing, or subscribing to who knows how many streaming services just to get you to what you've had on cable for 20 years, etc. Cable is easy. Streaming can still be a pain in the butt depending on the circumstance. Streaming has a ways to go IMO in terms of maturity and ultimately there needs to be some kind of standard so it just works like cable does, and it would be nice if it were a true a la carte.
 
.-.
businesslawyer said:
Could you stop that? We both know that is not what I said. However many years we have to give the Big East notice before leaving, the period resets every year on July 1. Sheesh.
Expand ...
I don't know that to be true. Have you read the big East Conference by-laws. I haven't been able to find a copy of them. I have read Connecticut's side agreement, but much of the actual exit process would be contained in the bylaws.

(Oh, and relax Biz. :rolleyes:)
 
metsfan2323 said:
So UConn will now join Holy Cross and Tulane on the Mt Rushmore of horrible decisions.

"A UConn spokesman declined to comment" says it all. They were too busy punching the wall.
Expand ...
What is this from? Comment on what?

If it’s on the Big 12 I hope they wouldn’t comment.
 
CL82 said:
I don't know that to be true. Have you read the big East Conference by-laws. I haven't been able to find a copy of them. I have read Connecticut's side agreement, but much of the actual exit process would be contained in the bylaws.

(Oh, and relax Biz. :rolleyes:)
Expand ...
I found these by-laws. Withdrawal is on page 12. Effective date of withdrawal must be July 1 and at least 27 months after the date that the Notice of Withdrawal is received by the Commissioner.

 
RSTuthill said:
They can probably do it faster by paying more. Anyway, the point is that June 30 really means very little. March 31 is more significant.
Expand ...
timed specifically to occur during the NCAA tournament and so you'd also have to forego a current year's share.
 
hoopsfan22 said:
Cable may be the dinosaur of platforms, but it's ubiquitous - you plug this cable into your TV or cable box, go to channel 1234 for your 12 o'clock kick or tip and voila the game is on your big screen TV no muss no fuss. No screwing around with different devices and getting it to work with your particular setup, no worrying about buffering or wondering "what's going on" when it's 12:02 and you still got nothing, or subscribing to who knows how many streaming services just to get you to what you've had on cable for 20 years, etc. Cable is easy. Streaming can still be a pain in the butt depending on the circumstance. Streaming has a ways to go IMO in terms of maturity and ultimately there needs to be some kind of standard so it just works like cable does, and it would be nice if it were a true a la carte.
Expand ...

Eh. You speak in to your remote and tell it to record every UConn football game. For the whole season.

You turn on your TV and it's on your home screen.

And it's saved to your DVR for retrieval in the future.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,171
Messages
4,555,723
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom