UConn needs a plan | Page 3 | The Boneyard

UConn needs a plan

Status
Not open for further replies.
nelsonmuntz said:
UConn is going to feel the consequences of not addressing the revenue issue even if we are invited to the Big 12. The buy in is going to be enormous. Boise figured out a way to get a better deal, why can't we? I think about 2/3's of the AAC would be better off with no conference TV contract and selling their content on their own. In 3 pages, no one has been able to defend the AAC deal.
Expand ...
That's because no one is trying to defend it. UConn is getting hosed by the deal. In 3 pages and as many years, you haven't explained how to get out of the deal.
 
Hathaway and then Pasqualoni was a nightmare. We all know it. They are gone and the wreckage from them had a tangible effect on where we are today. UConn got screwed over a few ways in the CR game. I think the only thing we can expect UConn to do is to keep building the football brand, stay at the high level our other sports are at and continue to rise academically. Still, there is no guarantee. But that doesn't mean we bow our head and let the slide into irrelevance start now. No, we keep pushing. We have to keep looking for the break to come. I think it is defeatist to look at our situation as simply waiting for a conference to increase our rights fees from 2M to 25M. Clearly, most metrics point to UConn as a valuable media property. Perception says our FB does not move the needle. That can change if we build on Diaco's success last year. Can't quit. We have to keep pushing forward.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
UConn is going to feel the consequences of not addressing the revenue issue even if we are invited to the Big 12. The buy in is going to be enormous. Boise figured out a way to get a better deal, why can't we? I think about 2/3's of the AAC would be better off with no conference TV contract and selling their content on their own. In 3 pages, no one has been able to defend the AAC deal.
Expand ...

Are you just trolling?
Boise "got a better deal" because they switched conferences! It's not that hard.

So, in order to execute on your awesome comparative "plan", one of the following would have to happen:

1) The AAC would have to fold like the WAC did (I think i just got moist)
2) UConn would have to switch conferences (which would impact revenue further given GOR)
3) Unicorns. Lots of unicorns.

Unless you know of a way to break either our contract with the AAC, or the AAC TV contract in general, we will continue to ask WTF your point is.

Maybe a mod can just change the thread title to "Nelson needs a plan"
 
pepband99 said:
Are you just trolling?
Boise "got a better deal" because they switched conferences! It's not that hard.

So, in order to execute on your awesome comparative "plan", one of the following would have to happen:

1) The AAC would have to fold like the WAC did (I think i just got moist)
2) UConn would have to switch conferences (which would impact revenue further given GOR)
3) Unicorns. Lots of unicorns.

Unless you know of a way to break either our contract with the AAC, or the AAC TV contract in general, we will continue to ask WTF your point is.

Maybe a mod can just change the thread title to "Nelson needs a plan"
Expand ...

That's the thing people seem to forget in this situation: Boise LEFT the MWC to go to the Big East. They got enticed BACK to the MWC with this sweetheart deal.

It's not like Boise shrewdly negotiated this deal within the confines of an existing agreement within the MWC. They negotiated it as a way to come back in - which incidentally also cost them a couple of million in BE exit fees, so how much are they really making under this new deal?
 
pepband99 said:
Are you just trolling?
Boise "got a better deal" because they switched conferences! It's not that hard.

So, in order to execute on your awesome comparative "plan", one of the following would have to happen:

1) The AAC would have to fold like the WAC did (I think i just got moist)
2) UConn would have to switch conferences (which would impact revenue further given GOR)
3) Unicorns. Lots of unicorns.

Unless you know of a way to break either our contract with the AAC, or the AAC TV contract in general, we will continue to ask WTF your point is.

Maybe a mod can just change the thread title to "Nelson needs a plan"
Expand ...

If you think UConn is only worth $2MM a year, then why do you think any other league would ever invite UConn to join it?
 
.-.
NYUConn said:
You already posted this yesterday and people spent 1.5 pages answering you: UConn needs a plan

Maybe sit the next couple of plays out?
Expand ...

You didn't answer that question at all.

The logic here is stay the course until someone rescues us. The reality is that on the current course, UConn athletics will not exist in any form worth rescuing by 2025. Only the densest people don't see where the entire market is going: online streaming and school/conference control of their own content, instead of network control of content.

You are arguing for staying in the old, failing model for less money, instead of simply doing the obvious and embracing the future. Got it.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
You didn't answer that question at all.

The logic here is stay the course until someone rescues us. The reality is that on the current course, UConn athletics will not exist in any form worth rescuing by 2025. Only the densest people don't see where the entire market is going: online streaming and school/conference control of their own content, instead of network control of content.

You are arguing for staying in the old, failing model for less money, instead of simply doing the obvious and embracing the future. Got it.
Expand ...

This is how I am imagining you posting on this board.

anigif_enhanced-buzz-15951-1377626720-4.gif
 
nelsonmuntz said:
You didn't answer that question at all.

The logic here is stay the course until someone rescues us. The reality is that on the current course, UConn athletics will not exist in any form worth rescuing by 2025. Only the densest people don't see where the entire market is going: online streaming and school/conference control of their own content, instead of network control of content.

You are arguing for staying in the old, failing model for less money, instead of simply doing the obvious and embracing the future. Got it.
Expand ...

You keep contradicting yourself.

The "logic here" is stay the course. Period. It's not "until someone rescues us" exclusively, it's until we have some contractual leverage. The same "online streaming and school/conference control of their own content" solutions simply aren't available now, and won't be for a few years, if ever.

Give us a workable option, and it might be interesting. Otherwise, you're just a click baiting troll.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
If you think UConn is only worth $2MM a year, then why do you think any other league would ever invite UConn to join it?
Expand ...


way to not address the post. again. yawn.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
You didn't answer that question at all.

The logic here is stay the course until someone rescues us. The reality is that on the current course, UConn athletics will not exist in any form worth rescuing by 2025. Only the densest people don't see where the entire market is going: online streaming and school/conference control of their own content, instead of network control of content.

You are arguing for staying in the old, failing model for less money, instead of simply doing the obvious and embracing the future. Got it.
Expand ...
Again - how does UConn extricate itself from the current TV deal?
 
.-.
noeynox said:
You hire Suge Knight to pay Mike Aresco a visit.
Expand ...

I love the idea of Suge Knight as our conference commissioner instead of Marianatto or Aresco. Holy sh@t that image is cracking me up.
 
auggie22 said:
I love the idea of Suge Knight as our conference commissioner instead of Marianatto or Aresco. Holy sh@t that image is cracking me up.
Expand ...

You all should have had him on UCONN's Payroll the last time The ACC was expanding. I can just picture him dangling that dips**** Swofford over a balcony by his ankles until he promised UMD's Spot to The Huskies.:cool:
 
.-.
CTMike said:
Again - how does UConn extricate itself from the current TV deal?
Expand ...

First of all, it is survival so we figure out a way out. Your argument is like saying it is easier to drown because the current is too strong.

The easiest path would be to find the G5 with the nearest term expiration, and just dump the entire league into that one. In fact, all the G5 should do that. If you aren't going to get paid for televising your games, why bother? I posted my idea in the El Paso thread a couple of weeks ago about reconstituting the G5 under one umbrella that was a loose scheduling and network alliance, but then letting individual teams sell most of their own content individually.

Make 10 6 team divisions instead of 5 conferences that no one cares about. UConn would have 5 set games against regional opponents every year: short distance drives, full stadiums, rivals. Then UConn would play 3 games against national G5 opponents (Boise, Houston, whoever), then have 4 at-large games that UConn could schedule any way they want.

You would have Three tiers of content:

Tier 1: Top 10-20% games from the G5, sell these to a national network, figure out a revenue split.
Tier 2: Division games could be sold regionally. Would SNY or NESN want to televise a Division of UConn, UMass, Navy, Temple, Buffalo, Army? Probably, at a decent price.
Tier 3: Probably close to half the inventory per school, saleable however the school wants.

I would let the schools produce the games. The national networks get paid a crapload of money to show up with a few cameras and ex-jocks. Have a single national studio for the Tier 2 pregame and halftime shows. I would like the A10 join this for hoops.

Low investment, low overhead, more revenue than today. And likely how most P5 conferences will look post 2025 with the exception of Tier 3 will belong to the conference. Once UConn is in that structure, it will likely both generate more revenue and create a benchmark to value UConn for other leagues.

Or we could continue to give our content away for free for eternity.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
You didn't answer that question at all.

The logic here is stay the course until someone rescues us. The reality is that on the current course, UConn athletics will not exist in any form worth rescuing by 2025. Only the densest people don't see where the entire market is going: online streaming and school/conference control of their own content, instead of network control of content.

You are arguing for staying in the old, failing model for less money, instead of simply doing the obvious and embracing the future. Got it.
Expand ...

Nobody thinks that is the fair value. Not on this board. Not among UConn staff. Not anybody at the American Conference Offices I suspect. But the American Conference was new. It cut a deal to maximize exposure of the league at a huge discount. ESPN is making loads of money on that deal. It was a short deal to allow the league to renegotiate when it was better situated and it's ratings were proven. In three years it can do that.

Do you think that even if UConn is still in the AAC, the payout will be $2M in 2020 and beyond? That's delusional. It will at least double, or T3 rights will go back to members along with a smaller increase. ESPN just lost the B1G content, so the American just go an even better hand than it already had as ESPN's most profitable college property.

Is that good enough? No, it still isn't. But acting like this absurdly low payout is going to continue is ridiculous. It should not be the basis for future decision making.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
First of all, it is survival so we figure out a way out. Your argument is like saying it is easier to drown because the current is too strong.

The easiest path would be to find the G5 with the nearest term expiration, and just dump the entire league into that one. In fact, all the G5 should do that. If you aren't going to get paid for televising your games, why bother? I posted my idea in the El Paso thread a couple of weeks ago about reconstituting the G5 under one umbrella that was a loose scheduling and network alliance, but then letting individual teams sell most of their own content individually.

Make 10 6 team divisions instead of 5 conferences that no one cares about. UConn would have 5 set games against regional opponents every year: short distance drives, full stadiums, rivals. Then UConn would play 3 games against national G5 opponents (Boise, Houston, whoever), then have 4 at-large games that UConn could schedule any way they want.

You would have Three tiers of content:

Tier 1: Top 10-20% games from the G5, sell these to a national network, figure out a revenue split.
Tier 2: Division games could be sold regionally. Would SNY or NESN want to televise a Division of UConn, UMass, Navy, Temple, Buffalo, Army? Probably, at a decent price.
Tier 3: Probably close to half the inventory per school, saleable however the school wants.

I would let the schools produce the games. The national networks get paid a crapload of money to show up with a few cameras and ex-jocks. Have a single national studio for the Tier 2 pregame and halftime shows. I would like the A10 join this for hoops.

Low investment, low overhead, more revenue than today. And likely how most P5 conferences will look post 2025 with the exception of Tier 3 will belong to the conference. Once UConn is in that structure, it will likely both generate more revenue and create a benchmark to value UConn for other leagues.

Or we could continue to give our content away for free for eternity.
Expand ...

Figure out a way is not really an answer.

The P5 leagues, gave the G5 option of forming one league and when the P5 was announced. I remember this as it was presented to Marinato, he passed and resigned shortly after. I don't think it's a terrible idea.
 
.-.
NYUConn said:
Gotta be honest, I like @nelsonmuntz's plan of sticking with the AAC.
Expand ...

Merge 3 leagues together and call it something else. Most Change of Control are triggered if the contractual entity doesn't retain 50% post transaction ownership, which no league would if it was a 3 or 5 way merger. All the TV contracts could be null and void.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Merge 3 leagues together and call it something else. Most Change of Control are triggered if the contractual entity doesn't retain 50% post transaction ownership, which no league would if it was a 3 or 5 way merger. All the TV contracts could be null and void.
Expand ...

So, let me get this straight...

Your plan is to further associate with more lower-producing G5's (because the very few G5 peers we have, if any, are mostly associated with us now), and you think we'll be worth more this way?

To answer it like you would (circuitous and nonsensical) - "If UConn vs the AAC is worth 2MM, you think UConn playing Maine and UNI is worth more - genius!"

I get it - our TV contract sucks. What people don't agree with you on is the idea that we're without any hope. Further G5 association like this is a white flag.
 
pepband99 said:
So, let me get this straight...

Your plan is to further associate with more lower-producing G5's (because the very few G5 peers we have, if any, are mostly associated with us now), and you think we'll be worth more this way?

To answer it like you would (circuitous and nonsensical) - "If UConn vs the AAC is worth 2MM, you think UConn playing Maine and UNI is worth more - genius!"

I get it - our TV contract sucks. What people don't agree with you on is the idea that we're without any hope. Further G5 association like this is a white flag.
Expand ...

In a shocking development, the Big 12 decided that adding a school making $2 a year from its media deal wouldn't add >$25 million to the Big 12.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
In a shocking development, the Big 12 decided that adding a school making $2 a year from its media deal wouldn't add >$25 million to the Big 12.
Expand ...
Another non answer. Troll.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
In a shocking development, the Big 12 decided that adding a school making $2 a year from its media deal wouldn't add >$25 million to the Big 12.
Expand ...
The Big 12 didn't decide anything. The Big12 was told if they added two teams and created a network it would be profitable. I am certain in that most in the Big12 wanted to do this. The only problem was the people paying for said network told the Big 12 no thanks. Can't create a network if there is no demand. The decision was made for them.
 
No one is coming to save UConn. Either UConn comes up with a way to save itself, or it is going to die. If UConn is still cashing $2MM checks in the AAC in 2024, NO ONE is going to add us.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,349
Messages
4,566,519
Members
10,469
Latest member
xxBlueChips


Top Bottom