Page 7 of 114 FirstFirst ... 567891757107 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 1140

Thread: Big East News

  1. #61
    Supporting Member DC Muskie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    The Beltway
    Posts
    11,237
    Quote Originally Posted by MHettel View Post
    You know hat they say, "ignorance is bliss."

    Fox already has the MLB and NFL and UFC. I get that. But they broadcast it on their main network. they plan to roll out a 24 hours sports only network here. That means 24 hours a day, 365 days a year of new programming. Maybe they move their main Fox network stuff over, but thats just a handful of Saturdays and Sundays each year, and then they have a hole in programming on the Main Network side.

    I guess I'm a little more risk averse than you. Thats probably because I have a real job.
    I'm not sure you answered the question.

    What do you think happens to us if Fox bails? Do you think we will never be on tv again? Is that your stance?

    Just focus on that point.
    Award Winning Poster Since 2015

  2. #62
    Senior PMI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    6,458
    Quote Originally Posted by MHettel View Post
    Here we go again with the Dayton market. 2 things. it overlaps the Cincy market, not entirely overlaps it, but there is common ground between the 2. Secondly, PEOPLE IN DAYTON ALREADY WATCH A TON OF COLLEGE BASKETBALL without Dayton being on tv, so what exactly do they expect to gain from adding Dayton? More people in Dayton watching? No. The goal is to tap a market where people DONT WATCH a ton of college basketball already, and adding a local team could MAKE THEM WATCH MORE. Fuck.

    So, assume you are right about the markets and Dayton is SOOOO attractive. Wouldnt they be in before Creighton?

    So, assume it's not about markets and more about institutional fit, facilities, commitment to BBall and just BBall in general. Would Dayton score high marks in these areas as well?

    Now assume it's about geography. Dayton fits better than St. Louis and Creighton.

    In reality, it's a little bit about all of teh above. But the facts are, Dayton just doesn't score as high on the "market" rankings as you think they do. There are 5 or more very solid BBall programs within a couple hours of Dayton. You think peoiple in Dayton are watching Dayton games or IU? Dayton games or OSU? Dayton games or Cincy, or UK, or XU...

    Lets now discuss bottom feeders. name ONE of the main big conferences that doesn't have at least a couple bottom feeders. Penn State, Northwestern, Oregon State, Washington State, Utah, Rutgers, South Florida, Auburn, BC, the list is LOOOONG. You have to have a mix of teams, some of which are always good, some of which are sometimes good, and some of which are rarely good. The alternative is a conference that has a bunch of 9-7 teams at the end of the season. And when you are in THAT scenario, you are forced to schedule only cupcakes in the OOC so you dont take any losses into conference play.

    and, from a national relevence standpoint, bigger is better. Lets say you have a 16 team conference and 7 teams make it (44%). Then a smaller conference of 12 has a similar percentage of teams make it (5). Thats 2 less teams in the dance with a chance to go deep and bring in notoriety and dollars for the conference. No do the same thing for a 10 team conference which gets 4 teams in. With any bad luck the entire conference could be home after the first weekend.

    the number of tourney teams per conference, while not important to you, are the types of things that analysts talk about and they shape perceptions. I dont want to see a graphic of teams per conference and see a 10 team BE coming 6th or 7th on that list. I want to be in the top 3. Thats the difference between SAYING that you are a basketball focused confernece and having OTHER PEOPLE say that you are a basketball focused conference.
    No they wouldn't be in before Creighton, because Creighton is a better basketball program. That's my whole point, man. The other shit is secondary. This is about basketball. Kansas is in the middle of nowhere and I'm pretty sure any basketball conference would take that addition. You're right in that it's a little bit about all of the above. A little bit. But it's a LOT about basketball. You can believe that Fox and ESPN are going to have their people fights until the bloody death like some scene out of Anchorman all you want, but the bottom line is, if Xavier, Georgetown, Marquette, Villanova, Butler, etc. all remain great programs, this league is in no jeopardy. Good players will keep coming and the games will be on TV.

    As for the bottom feeders, of course every conference has them. It's impossible for everyone to win! But you don't actively seek out new bottom feeders. Nobody in the current Big East thought, "You know what, we should add X, BU and CU to be our three worst programs so that people from Cinci, Indi, and Omaha watch more of our basketball games." Why would you just add Richmond and SLU if you don't legitimately believe in their basketball sustainability (which maybe they do even if I don't)?

    As for "bigger is better," well wasn't that the model of the old, dead Big East? The football conferences are certainly going that route, but they have/had the luxury of having plenty of big time programs programs that put football up top, lining up at their doorsteps waiting to get in. How many elite, private basketball only schools are out there lining up for us? The answer is zero. If we could get ND, great, but that's not the case. With that in mind, as soon as you start getting bigger for the sake of getting bigger, all you're really doing is adding programs that aren't as good at what you've already got.

  3. #63
    Senior PMI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    6,458
    On second thought, why am I wasting time trying to convince the guy who a year ago thought we should go independent? Clearly you don't get it.

  4. #64
    All-Conference LA Muskie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    7,210
    Quote Originally Posted by MHettel View Post
    ??????????????????

    What the hell goes on in your head? Fox is waging war on ESPN. We're now completely aligned with FOX, and are essentaill the tip of the speak when it comes to stealing some of the dominance that ESPN has in college hoops. If Fox fails, do you REALLY think ESPN will just stroll on in and throw a 12 year deal with $500 million at our feet? No, they wont do that at all. They will make an example out of us. They will allow us and GTOWN and everyone else to wither away into obscurity without a TV deal while they look at the other conferneces and say "let that be a lesson to you"

    You might be right that FOX has a good chance of being succesfull in this endeavor, but putting your head in the sand when it comes to how high the stakes are is just choosing to be ignorant.
    MHettel, media empires are in business to make money. They aren't in the business of waging wars or imposing retribution. If Fox fails (and it won't -- it may not turn out to be a great deal for them, but the network will not fail in a 12-year span), ESPN will sign us in a heartbeat if there is value there. The price may go down because ESPN will have established its monopoly, but it won't be because of "revenge."

    Media companies don't do business like 7 year olds. Do you think the hollywood execs like the actors, directors and agents they work with on a daily basis? Or -- better yet -- the crooked producers? Hell no. They do so because they make one another a crapload of money.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by LA Muskie View Post
    MHettel, media empires are in business to make money. They aren't in the business of waging wars or imposing retribution. If Fox fails (and it won't -- it may not turn out to be a great deal for them, but the network will not fail in a 12-year span), ESPN will sign us in a heartbeat if there is value there. The price may go down because ESPN will have established its monopoly, but it won't be because of "revenge."

    Media companies don't do business like 7 year olds. Do you think the hollywood execs like the actors, directors and agents they work with on a daily basis? Or -- better yet -- the crooked producers? Hell no. They do so because they make one another a crapload of money.
    Extend your line of thought. Sure ESPN can make more money by signing XU, GTown and everyone to a TV deal. In isolation, they would benefit from doing that more than NOT doing it. But they would benefit the MOST by using a failed attempt by Fox to remind EVERYONE ELSE they do business with that they are the only show in town and that they set the market. Competition. Real. Basic. Stuff.

    Look at the Patriots. How do they do business. They tell you what your contract will be, then you accept it or leave. If you leave they replace you. And everyone else on the teams knows those are the terms.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by PMI View Post
    As for the bottom feeders, of course every conference has them. It's impossible for everyone to win! But you don't actively seek out new bottom feeders. Nobody in the current Big East thought, "You know what, we should add X, BU and CU to be our three worst programs so that people from Cinci, Indi, and Omaha watch more of our basketball games." Why would you just add Richmond and SLU if you don't legitimately believe in their basketball sustainability (which maybe they do even if I don't)?

    As for "bigger is better," well wasn't that the model of the old, dead Big East? The football conferences are certainly going that route, but they have/had the luxury of having plenty of big time programs programs that put football up top, lining up at their doorsteps waiting to get in. How many elite, private basketball only schools are out there lining up for us? The answer is zero. If we could get ND, great, but that's not the case. With that in mind, as soon as you start getting bigger for the sake of getting bigger, all you're really doing is adding programs that aren't as good at what you've already got.
    I dont understand how Richmond and SLU are considered bottom feeders. Richmond has been anywhere from decent to pretty darn good for about 15 years. Not great, but good. SLU has also been solid on and off for some time, and very good for a couple years. SLU has first rate facilities, a solid fan base, a market with literally NO local competition, and their addition to the BE can lure a top coach who could stay in place for awhile.

    Look, aside from a handful of the very elite programs, there are no guarantees when it comes to success. You have to look at the parts and determine if the success is sustainable. Using your logic, VCU wouldnt be attractive eaither right? In my mind their primary asset is their coach, who could be gone in an instant.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by DC Muskie View Post
    I'm not sure you answered the question.

    What do you think happens to us if Fox bails? Do you think we will never be on tv again? Is that your stance?

    Just focus on that point.
    My point is that we assume this is a "no lose" situation. If it all works out, it will be good as gold and a great thing for the school. I expect it to work out.

    But on the other hand, I'm realisitc enough to understand that it COULD all go terribibly wrong if Fox fails and the impact of that might put us in a place that is worse than where we are today.

    There is a downside. I see it. I do not think it's very likely to happen. But at least I'm not sticking my head in the sand.

  8. #68
    Supporting Member GoMuskies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    34,313
    There is no downside.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by GoMuskies View Post
    There is no downside.
    Famous last words.

  10. #70
    Supporting Member GoMuskies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    34,313
    None

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •