Hey fellas, DePaul fan here, been following your board the last couple of days... you guys have been picking up on some great stuff.
Its definitely an exciting time for the C7, thought I'd share a snippet with you guys from one of the DePaul boards that the Creighton AD said the other day.
Creighton's AD:
"We're not unhappy with the Valley. In fact, we like where we are. But ever since I've been at Creighton, for 30 years (32 now), Creighton has had a consistent stance. If a conference of private Midwest schools, schools with like missions to Creighton, became available, we would look at that."
IMHO: Creighton, Xavier, SLU, Dayton would be no-brainers and add to the MU/DPU midwestern flavor to the new Big East. Then either pursue VCU or Butler if we wanted to go non catholic.
unnatural carnal knowledge Dayton. No need for them.
Thanks for the quote though. Welcome to the board.
Dayton definitely is the smaller fish, but considering the Great Midwest-Old Catholic alliance ties MU and DPU has, I think they'll be in the conversation. Personally, would rather see Butler and VCU added.
Creighton over Dayton. The Jays had the 6th best attendance in NCAA basketball last year and made the Final Four in men's soccer this past month. If you had a league with the C7 and Creighton, Butler and Xavier, 5 of those teams (Marquette, Georgetown, St. John's, Creighton and Xavier) made the NCAA tourney in men's soccer and Georgetown lost in the final game. So in addition to being a pretty good basketball conference, it would also be a very good conference for other sports like soccer.
I still think despite being a geographic outlier, Gonzaga is as close to must-add as they come. They provide immediate name recognition, quality, and increased exposure.
Also, tell Purnell to get his act in gear! If Melvin and Young leave DePaul without ever sniffing a NCAA Tournament, that'd be really disappointing.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 08:50:00 AM
Hey fellas, DePaul fan here, been following your board the last couple of days... you guys have been picking up on some great stuff.
Its definitely an exciting time for the C7, thought I'd share a snippet with you guys from one of the DePaul boards that the Creighton AD said the other day.
Creighton's AD:
"We're not unhappy with the Valley. In fact, we like where we are. But ever since I've been at Creighton, for 30 years (32 now), Creighton has had a consistent stance. If a conference of private Midwest schools, schools with like missions to Creighton, became available, we would look at that."
IMHO: Creighton, Xavier, SLU, Dayton would be no-brainers and add to the MU/DPU midwestern flavor to the new Big East. Then either pursue VCU or Butler if we wanted to go non catholic.
Xavier is the only no-brainer. Creighton, SLU and Dayton are prime candidates, but whether which or all are invited depends on whether this is going to be a 10-, 12- or 14-team conference.
And a snippet for you (all in fun, of course)... from the Paint Touches twitter:
DePaul must feel like the younger brother who gets to go to the amusement park with his older brother and friends.
Evidently, Strotty is throwing a hat into the ring for the "Great America Conference"
Welcome Laux. Please keep us updated on what you hear about the DePaul arena situation. I think you'll find most MU fans here supportive of fans of other teams as long as they don't talk crazy on our board. Many of us Chicago types fully support a viable DePaul program and long for the day when the cross-border rivalry makes the DePaul/MU game a huge deal once again. (Just as long as we win and recruit at a higher level.)
Quick story from last's year's game. Warriorchick and I are sitting courtside next to Steve Kerr and his kid. Some drunk DePaul fan from Row 2 starts flinging f-bombs at the end of the game and doesn't even realize who he's talking to when Steve politely asks him to tone it down. (I guess he needed a letter from LW too.)
See you in the New BEast!
Brew,
You're preaching to the choir. Hopefully though it seems DePaul found some mojo in their recent games against AU and ASU. How that plays when conference starts we shall see. Our concern is the lack of 2013 recruiting success and whether a successful year this year (which in our mind would be an NIT bid, 17 wins) will help with the 2014 class in Chicago (which is loaded again).
As for Gonzaga, I think if you go that route, you need another west coast school and then St. Mary's comes into play. But then you have the East coast/West Coast travel and TV scheduling nightmares. Tough sell IMO.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:03:57 AM
Brew,
You're preaching to the choir. Hopefully though it seems DePaul found some mojo in their recent games against AU and ASU. How that plays when conference starts we shall see. Our concern is the lack of 2013 recruiting success and whether a successful year this year (which in our mind would be an NIT bid, 17 wins) will help with the 2014 class in Chicago (which is loaded again).
As for Gonzaga, I think if you go that route, you need another west coast school and then St. Mary's comes into play. But then you have the East coast/West Coast travel and TV scheduling nightmares. Tough sell IMO.
Or you have a made-for-TV doubleheader to go up against Big Monday.
JS,
If you are going to place a bet on where the new stadium is going to be located, my money is on Cermak, east of Indiana (the discussed McCormick locale).
The Rahm-father wants the stadium there.... and the Rahm-father is a BIG supporter of DePaul. The McPier organization has $100 million in bonds to burn and can help fund it. Its a location with the infrastructure to support the arena (being next to McCormick). There are no major clean up/environmental issues (like the Finkl or Morton's site). And there aren't strong owners associations/alderman opposed to the site.
So again, if you are betting man, its McCormick. Me personally, coming in from the SW Suburbs off Rt. 55.... I like the locale. It's a big tailgate area (lots of smaller lots down there) for Bears games and its a neighborhood is in the middle of turning over from industrial to residential with bars and restaraunts popping up (that will accelerate-Kroll's being a great sports bar in the area).
So personally, I think its a win/win... we shall see. Just far from campus (Lincoln Park). But its close to downtown so that will cater to alumn working in the city and the new dorms downtown will be close too.
And yes, I expect good natured ribbing as well (and maybe bad natured too :) ). Most of us remaining die-hard Demon fans know the crap our program has put on the court and realize we need to be pulled into this new league. My hope is our leadership just stays silent and thank their stars that this is another opportunity to relaunch the program. A viable DePaul can add a pretty damm strong asset to the new league given the untapped Chicago market.
Omaha is a vastly underrated sports town -- well worth an away game roadtrip. They spent a pile of money for a new baseball stadium for the college world series and put that stadium downtown. The Qwest Center is an outstanding arena. They have a fun bar district downtown and the airport with plenty of good, affordable hotels is minutes away. While Cornhusker football rules the state, the good basketball team has always been in Omaha.
Quote from: Benny B on December 14, 2012, 09:06:52 AM
Or you have a made-for-TV doubleheader to go up against Big Monday.
Or better, a triple-header. How's this weekly lineup in the central timezone:
6:00 pm Butler @ Georgetown
8:00 pm Villanova @ Marquette
10:00 pm Xavier @ Gonzaga
The next week...
6:00 pm Gonzaga @ St. John's
8:00 pm Marquette @ DePaul (for you, Laux ;) )
10:00 pm Georgetown @ St. Mary's
The next week...
6:00 pm Butler @ Xavier
8:00 pm Georgetown @ Creighton
10:00 pm Marquette @ Gonzaga
And so on and so forth.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:14:44 AM
And yes, I expect good natured ribbing as well (and maybe bad natured too :) ). Most of us remaining die-hard Demon fans know the crap our program has put on the court and realize we need to be pulled into this new league. My hope is our leadership just stays silent and thank their stars that this is another opportunity to relaunch the program. A viable DePaul can add a pretty damm strong asset to the new league given the untapped Chicago market.
Here's a hot potato out of the blue for you to handle. Is Lenti-Ponsetto the problem?
I like that... but can I make a comment. Whatever this new league is, I hope the hell we don't sign with ESPN. Ever since the 'Cuse and Pitt defection (which I still think ESPN played a role), that network has been decidely anti-Big East.
I say the new network should sign with NBC SPorts. That way we become their flagship bball conference and have a national TV network for weekend games. I could see Big East games highlighted along with NHL games on the weekend (if the NHL ever gets their ass in gear).
Plus, NBC Sports would be more apt to deal with local cable to broadcast more games locally.
No need to rush on adding more teams. Take their time and make right decision because you have to live with the decision long term. I would not be chasing Dayton, Creighton or any other mid major. Both are decent programs but they are not going anywhere. Who knows maybe a smaller conference is better conference.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:10:42 AM
JS,
If you are going to place a bet on where the new stadium is going to be located, my money is on Cermak, east of Indiana (the discussed McCormick locale).
[...]
Just far from campus (Lincoln Park). But its close to downtown so that will cater to alumn working in the city and the new dorms downtown will be close too.
I was just going to say: Isn't that a somewhat inconvenient hike from campus?
Quote from: LittleMurs on December 14, 2012, 09:20:36 AM
Here's a hot potato out of the blue for you to handle. Is Lenti-Ponsetto the problem?
Does a Bear sh#t in the woods? Of course she is the problem. 9.9 out 10 DePaul fans would agree.
Most of our discussions center on how we can "reassign" her out of the AD's role. My feeling is she can be the Director of Womens Sports in the new league. My dream would be to get a guy like Jon McDonough in a role of AD... but thats a dream.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:21:47 AM
I like that... but can I make a comment. Whatever this new league is, I hope the hell we don't sign with ESPN. Ever since the 'Cuse and Pitt defection (which I still think ESPN played a role), that network has been decidely anti-Big East.
I say the new network should sign with NBC SPorts. That way we become their flagship bball conference and have a national TV network for weekend games. I could see Big East games highlighted along with NHL games on the weekend (if the NHL ever gets their ass in gear).
Plus, NBC Sports would be more apt to deal with local cable to broadcast more games locally.
I have a friend in the TV industry (Fox Sports) and he thinks NBC Sports is a decent bet because they are "hungry for content."
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 09:23:23 AM
I was just going to say: Isn't that a somewhat inconvenient hike from campus?
Its a haul form LP, but I think the Mayor is adding a new EL stop near by. Getting more student involvement isnt my concern, if they are a winning program, then the lazy asses in Lincoln Park will come.
A near downtown location in my opinion has better appeal from a working alumni, corporate setting. And any new dedicated DePaul facility will be better than the crap at the Horizon. Plus, being closer to the South side may be beneficial from a recruiting standpoint.... that much easier for recruits and recruits family to see games.
It's a double-edged sword. Like it or not, ESPN is the biggest kid on the block. They will attract the most eyeballs. And they have already accomplished their mission of destroying the Big East. There's value in trying to repair that relationship. Even though I hate them and everything they stand for. Mickey Mouse sucks.
NBC Sports would be a viable alternative, but you have to realize that it puts us at a decided disadvantage. People won't be as quick to flip to that station. When you're in a bar with 2-3 TVs, how often do any of them have NBC Sports on? And how many have ESPN and/or ESPN2?
I think we have to think of this in terms of what's best for the future of the league. If NBC makes it that worth our while (like they did with the Premier League) then you do it and hope you can run up against ESPN. I'm talking $3-4M per year. But if they are offering $2.5M per team and ESPN is offering $2.2M, you take the ESPN deal and realize the exposure will offset the few hundred thousand you lose in the process.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:14:44 AM
And yes, I expect good natured ribbing as well (and maybe bad natured too :) ). Most of us remaining die-hard Demon fans know the crap our program has put on the court and realize we need to be pulled into this new league. My hope is our leadership just stays silent and thank their stars that this is another opportunity to relaunch the program. A viable DePaul can add a pretty damm strong asset to the new league given the untapped Chicago market.
Not just viable... we need you guys to compete and beat us in a game where MU isn't favored by 42-1/2. Right now, beating you guys is like winning $3.00 on a two-dollar lottery ticket... we need to be playing games where each team feels like they just won a million dollars when they win.
So get off your duffs and reassign L-P (or whatever) and build a new arena already... and while you're at it, paint half of the arena's seats blue and gold for us. It will help us feel more at home when we take the place over once a year.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 09:24:31 AM
I have a friend in the TV industry (Fox Sports) and he thinks NBC Sports is a decent bet because they are "hungry for content."
Even hungrier with the NHL labor dispute (especially if the season is cancelled) and a 12 team college league has a LOT of inventory to broadcast.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:21:47 AM
I like that... but can I make a comment. Whatever this new league is, I hope the hell we don't sign with ESPN. Ever since the 'Cuse and Pitt defection (which I still think ESPN played a role), that network has been decidely anti-Big East.
I say the new network should sign with NBC SPorts. That way we become their flagship bball conference and have a national TV network for weekend games. I could see Big East games highlighted along with NHL games on the weekend (if the NHL ever gets their ass in gear).
Plus, NBC Sports would be more apt to deal with local cable to broadcast more games locally.
Does NBCSports have anything similar to ESPN3? That's crucial IMO.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 14, 2012, 09:27:29 AM
I think we have to think of this in terms of what's best for the future of the league. If NBC makes it that worth our while (like they did with the Premier League) then you do it and hope you can run up against ESPN. I'm talking $3-4M per year. But if they are offering $2.5M per team and ESPN is offering $2.2M, you take the ESPN deal and realize the exposure will offset the few hundred thousand you lose in the process.
Call me old-school, just like the feel of an NBC broadcast Saturday cbb game. I understand ESPN being the 800 lb. gorilla, but the exclusivity that NBC might offer could very well trump what ESPN brings to the table. And for rebuilding teams like DePaul, if they get EVERYONE of their conference games broadcast locally on a channel available to the local market, that beats being put on the E2 or the U three/four times a year.
Quote from: PTM on December 14, 2012, 09:30:49 AM
Does NBCSports have anything similar to ESPN3? That's crucial IMO.
Not right now.... but St. John's does.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 14, 2012, 09:27:29 AM
NBC Sports would be a viable alternative, but you have to realize that it puts us at a decided disadvantage. People won't be as quick to flip to that station. When you're in a bar with 2-3 TVs, how often do any of them have NBC Sports on? And how many have ESPN and/or ESPN2?
Brew, this is because they have the content. If another network has comparable content that people want to watch, you will see this dynamic change over time.
Quote from: PTM on December 14, 2012, 09:30:49 AM
Does NBCSports have anything similar to ESPN3? That's crucial IMO.
I think everyone will at some point in the not to distant future.
Quote from: PTM on December 14, 2012, 09:30:49 AM
Does NBCSports have anything similar to ESPN3? That's crucial IMO.
They do alot of promotion during Sunday Night Football around a big immersive web experience they've created supporting that content. I've never been to it so no idea how it works but it looks pretty cool. I would wager they could/would do something for hoops if they secured it.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 09:24:31 AM
I have a friend in the TV industry (Fox Sports) and he thinks NBC Sports is a decent bet because they are "hungry for content."
And NBC Sports has that brand new (well newly remodeled) big building in Stamford, CT to run the network taht they are "trying to fill.".
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on December 14, 2012, 09:33:15 AM
Brew, this is because they have the content. If another network has comparable content that people want to watch, you will see this dynamic change over time.
Also, viewership isn't what drives the current TV contract model... it's demand for the station on a package. Viewership equates to advertising revenue, and right now, none of the cable networks seem to care about that. They simply need content that is going to allow them to get the station on a basic cable lineup or charge a higher user fee if it already is.
If NBCSports carried the Super Bowl exclusively and showed fishing shows the other 364 days a year, they could care less about how many people are watching the channel because every cable and satellite distributor is going to be paying them a fat user fee for the entire year.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 08:52:27 AM
Dayton definitely is the smaller fish, but considering the Great Midwest-Old Catholic alliance ties MU and DPU has, I think they'll be in the conversation. Personally, would rather see Butler and VCU added.
VCU is/was a flash in the pan. No interest. Rather have Creighton and/or Dayton.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 09:24:31 AM
I have a friend in the TV industry (Fox Sports) and he thinks NBC Sports is a decent bet because they are "hungry for content."
I would agree with that sentiment. Fox is another because they are going to launch a national Fox sports channel next year by rebranding one of their current, lesser viewed channels.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 09:33:37 AM
I think everyone will at some point in the not to distant future.
Yes, but it will all be tied to authentication meaning you can't get it unless you subscribe to a distributor.
All I'm saying is this; ESPN has a vested interest in weakening the C7's negotiating position with regards to any potential future TV deal. They will want that new league, but at a discount, like the A10 got. So whatever you read coming from "industry sources" in an ESPN article know that those "sources" work for Bristol and want the C7 cheap.
The best thing going for the C7 is there will be competition for that broadcast rights. CBS, FOX, NBC will be players. I'm hoping for NBC because they will be eager to fill content on NBC sports and will be willing to really help grow the league. It can be a differentiator in how the league is marketed. I'm old enough to remember what WGN did for DePaul, and both the station and school benefited from the relationship. I think an NBC/Big East deal can be similar on a larger scale. If we as a collective Catholic conference are going to strike it out on our own, lets think bigger and newer. Creat our own new brand with a willing partner.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on December 14, 2012, 09:40:36 AM
VCU is/was a flash in the pan. No interest. Rather have Creighton and/or Dayton.
When I think of VCU, I think of UNC-Charlotte during its CUSA heyday. I just don't think that their future is assured.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:42:24 AM
All I'm saying is this; ESPN has a vested interest in weakening the C7's negotiating position with regards to any potential future TV deal. They will want that new league, but at a discount, like the A10 got. So whatever you read coming from "industry sources" in an ESPN article know that those "sources" work for Bristol and want the C7 cheap.
Agreed. Mickey Mouse is a ruthless, manipulative bastard.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 14, 2012, 09:42:19 AM
Yes, but it will all be tied to authentication meaning you can't get it unless you subscribe to a distributor.
I've heard rumors of google or Apple wanting in on digital content production/distribution. Any truth to that? If they did it, there are an awful lot of ipads floating around these days.
Quote from: Benny B on December 14, 2012, 09:45:01 AM
Agreed. Mickey Mouse is a ruthless, manipulative bastard.
I don't trust the little rat either.
Butler and VCU would obviously be more desirable than Catholic schools if the conference does not want to be considered "the Catholic conference." That type of conference may not still well from a PR standpoint.
Quote from: Benny B on December 14, 2012, 09:40:19 AM
Also, viewership isn't what drives the current TV contract model... it's demand for the station on a package. Viewership equates to advertising revenue, and right now, none of the cable networks seem to care about that. They simply need content that is going to allow them to get the station on a basic cable lineup or charge a higher user fee if it already is.
If NBCSports carried the Super Bowl exclusively and showed fishing shows the other 364 days a year, they could care less about how many people are watching the channel because every cable and satellite distributor is going to be paying them a fat user fee for the entire year.
Anybody (Chicos probably) know the ratio of revenue derived from distribution/advertising by cable networks?
Quote from: Avenue Commons on December 14, 2012, 09:40:36 AM
VCU is/was a flash in the pan. No interest. Rather have Creighton and/or Dayton.
If by flash in the pan, you mean six straight 20+ win seasons, six NCAA tourneys in the past nine seasons and a postseason appearance in eight of the last nine.
I'd take Creighton for several reasons over VCU, but I'll take their resume over that of Dayton any day.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 14, 2012, 08:58:42 AM
I still think despite being a geographic outlier, Gonzaga is as close to must-add as they come. They provide immediate name recognition, quality, and increased exposure.
Also, tell Purnell to get his act in gear! If Melvin and Young leave DePaul without ever sniffing a NCAA Tournament, that'd be really disappointing.
Gonzaga would be a great choice. I just do not see it happening. This league will be for all sports. The Zags will have the worst travel situation for all their games in every sport. Costly and a major drag for student athletes.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 09:45:55 AM
I've heard rumors of google or Apple wanting in on digital content production/distribution. Any truth to that? If they did it, there are an awful lot of ipads floating around these days.
Sure, rumors have been around forever....until they are presented the price and then they go away. The leagues, studios, networks, etc, have to guarantee their money. So if they are getting billions from Charter, Directv, Comcast, Fios, Dish, Time Warner, etc, then any deal they do with an OTT (over the top) player has to make sense where they don't kill their revenue streams elsewhere.
This is why Netflix makes such a small profit, they're getting killed on content costs and inevitably if they plan on being around the next 5 to 10 years will have to jack up rates considerably. Right now it's all a balancing act, but the rights owners know they can't go direct to the consumer without destroying their revenue streams.
I would also add that most of the data we are seeing as an industry is showing the the TV dominates, absolutely dominates viewing habits. Sure, the use of video on smart phones and tablets has increased considerably, but not at the expense of the television. In preference study after preference study, people would rather view their content on a large tv than PC, Tablet, Smartphone. As such, how many people will throw dollars down to watch live sports that can be consumed on a small device that also has to deal with buffering, bandwidth connection, etc vs an appliance they turn on and it's just there.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:14:44 AM
And yes, I expect good natured ribbing as well (and maybe bad natured too :) ). Most of us remaining die-hard Demon fans know the crap our program has put on the court and realize we need to be pulled into this new league. My hope is our leadership just stays silent and thank their stars that this is another opportunity to relaunch the program. A viable DePaul can add a pretty damm strong asset to the new league given the untapped Chicago market.
Welcome along for the ride! A somewhat stronger DePaul benefits the entire league. Hopefully this opens the door to the local developments you'll need to achieve a higher level.
So bottom line, between the lines (between the bottom lines?), if Creighton is invited they're in. All indications are that our top of the list candidates also really want to be a part of this. Very exciting.
Another DePaul fan... pardon the Blue Demon Invasion (...turnabout is fair play!)
One of the things that Comcast/NBC has going for it is a network of Regional Sports Networks that also need programming. There are Comcast SportsNets in New England, Washington, Philadelphia, Chicago, and Baltimore. That, and the parent company is an internet provider who happens to own an online video management company (http://www.theplatform.com) and who just signed a content sharing agreement with Yahoo!.
Wouldn't be so quick to rule out the attractiveness of Comcast/NBC.
As for DePaul, the culture that's been created there is one that almost breeds loyalty to a fault. It has to change if they're to be successful in the long-term. And let's face it - Wainwright was one of the most disasterous hires in recent NCAA history. Completely tore down whatever moment Dave Leitao had built before he left for Virginia. And Purnell is still trying to pick up the pieces three years in.
I just want a steady stream of updates to read all day until this is finished! This waiting is brutal
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on December 14, 2012, 09:33:15 AM
Brew, this is because they have the content. If another network has comparable content that people want to watch, you will see this dynamic change over time.
I won't dispute that. But that's counting unhatched chickens. When the bartender opens the bar, they turn the TV on to ESPN. Right now that's pretty much a given. Is it better to try to get on ESPN now so we get immediate exposure or hope that NBC Sports has enough going for it in 5-10 years that it will be an automatic choice then?
All I'm saying is we don't want to discount ESPN simply because they are d-bags. They are powerful d-bags with a lot of eyes already on them. Eyes that would benefit a fledgling league trying to stake its claim as a blossoming basketball powerhouse.
Quote from: Goose on December 14, 2012, 09:23:09 AM
No need to rush on adding more teams. Take their time and make right decision because you have to live with the decision long term. I would not be chasing Dayton, Creighton or any other mid major. Both are decent programs but they are not going anywhere. Who knows maybe a smaller conference is better conference.
Please do not ever refer to a school that may be included in this new league as mid major. The C7 and whoever is included in the new league will compete at the highest level in college basketball.
Quote from: chapman on December 14, 2012, 10:23:08 AM
So bottom line, between the lines (between the bottom lines?), if Creighton is invited they're in. All indications are that our top of the list candidates also really want to be a part of this. Very exciting.
Of course they do. This is a better, more valuable conference. That's why UDPride's statements were so CUTE - it sounded like my grandmother talking about the quaint days growing up on a farm in Green County.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 14, 2012, 10:13:07 AM
I would also add that most of the data we are seeing as an industry is showing the the TV dominates, absolutely dominates viewing habits. Sure, the use of video on smart phones and tablets has increased considerably, but not at the expense of the television. In preference study after preference study, people would rather view their content on a large tv than PC, Tablet, Smartphone. As such, how many people will throw dollars down to watch live sports that can be consumed on a small device that also has to deal with buffering, bandwidth connection, etc vs an appliance they turn on and it's just there.
What about "smart tvs." Plug in a CAT-6 and bandwidth shouldn't be an issue right?
Quote from: Badgerhater on December 14, 2012, 09:15:53 AM
Omaha is a vastly underrated sports town -- well worth an away game roadtrip. They spent a pile of money for a new baseball stadium for the college world series and put that stadium downtown. The Qwest Center is an outstanding arena. They have a fun bar district downtown and the airport with plenty of good, affordable hotels is minutes away. While Cornhusker football rules the state, the good basketball team has always been in Omaha.
+1
I have been to Omaha on business and it is an unexpectedly fun place. Easy and cheap to fly to from the Chicago/Milwaukee area (Southwest Airlines, y'all!), and extremely hassle-free to get around.
And Badgerhater, you forgot to mention the steaks. The Omaha Steaks.
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:14:44 AM
A viable DePaul can add a pretty damm strong asset to the new league given the untapped Chicago market.
Absolutely!!
What do you mean....MU taps the Chicago market just about every year (McNeal, Taylor, Acker, Wade, etc)and add about 50% to DePauls attendance as well
Quote from: Norm on December 14, 2012, 08:58:21 AM
Creighton over Dayton. The Jays had the 6th best attendance in NCAA basketball last year and made the Final Four in men's soccer this past month. If you had a league with the C7 and Creighton, Butler and Xavier, 5 of those teams (Marquette, Georgetown, St. John's, Creighton and Xavier) made the NCAA tourney in men's soccer and Georgetown lost in the final game. So in addition to being a pretty good basketball conference, it would also be a very good conference for other sports like soccer.
i just hate going another 450 miles west when we consider the travel for non-revenue sports. i realize I'm doing a 180 since I originally thought Gonzaga was worth traveling too, but the more I think about it, the more I think that the conference gets us into the big eastern markets and I'm actually going all the way to the other extreme with VCU, but would still take Dayton over Creighton.
Also, after McDermott leaves I don't know if they drop a notch or not.
Quote from: bamamarquettefan on December 14, 2012, 11:57:37 AM
i just hate going another 450 miles west when we consider the travel for non-revenue sports. i realize I'm doing a 180 since I originally thought Gonzaga was worth traveling too, but the more I think about it, the more I think that the conference gets us into the big eastern markets and I'm actually going all the way to the other extreme with VCU, but would still take Dayton over Creighton.
Also, after McDermott leaves I don't know if they drop a notch or not.
Which McDermott? When Doug moves on, we'll see how much his Dad relied on him to get the Bluejays on top. Creighton does have a great record of holding onto its coaches, i.e. Dana Altman.
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 10:57:08 AM
What about "smart tvs." Plug in a CAT-6 and bandwidth shouldn't be an issue right?
It's the
over-the-top part that kills you. Any one of the big players -- Microsoft with the XBox, Apple with AppleTV, Google with their smart TVs and set top boxes -- could pony up the money and technology to be the distributor of
this any league.
But when you add in the fact that they don't own an end-to-end distribution (Google does, but only in parts of KC), they are always going to come over a programming companies lines. How much content will TimeWarner or Comcast allow Google to out bid them for before they start raising rates on their internet service or adding bandwidth caps?
I just read that Aero, a NYC service that provides local over-the-air channels via the internet, signed with Bloomberg TV, their first pay contract. Content is heading that way, but there are tons of hurdles. I'd actually love to hear Chicos speak on this sometime ... maybe I can taunt him into a post on the Superbar ...
Quote from: lawwarrior12 on December 14, 2012, 10:57:08 AM
What about "smart tvs." Plug in a CAT-6 and bandwidth shouldn't be an issue right?
Yes, that's an option, but you still get into the cost side and the rights ownership side. Many distributors today let you gain access to their content through a third device like a tablet or smartphone. For example, we deliver about 100 channels that customers can stream to those devices, but all of that is contingent upon those channels granting those rights. Then there are third party apps like HBO Go, Big Ten To Go, etc, that are all authenticated content as well...meaning you get access to them if you subscribe to a television provider. In some cases you can use a third party device, even, like Roku, a connected TV, Playstation or Xbox, but in all those cases you're authenticating with your account on your television provider. So to see HBO Go on on your connected TV, you have to subscribe to HBO via your provider. You can't go direct to HBO and buy it and the reason is money and also support. HBO relies on the Time Warners of the world for the delivery, customer service, billing, marketing, etc, etc....and the money.
Here's a simple mathematics way to look at it.
Say ESPN gets $5 per subscriber per month from Comcast and their 25 million customers at 85% penetration (meaning ESPN must be carried in 85% of their packages). That's about $1.275 billion per year in revenue just from Comcast. You can then extrapolate that to other providers (Directv's 20 million, Dish's 14 million, etc, etc).
Now, think about that 85% of customers that have to pay for ESPN even if they can't stand sports, they're stuck paying it anyway....that's big money for ESPN. If they were to start selling it direct, perhaps to your connected television as you stated, now earn the wrath of many distributors that are paying them billions (like the Comcast example I gave), but they are also risking further dollars because the only people that are going to sign up directly for their service are sports fans. Ultimately, as the pendulum swings to that type of model, that $5 charge becomes more like $10 to $15 when the 85% that must pay for it now at a "lower price" becomes a much higher price when only 40% or 45% actually buy it.
So at the end of the day, it's about the rights to this content and what they are willing to risk financially to carve up those rights. Plenty of risk, perhaps some reward, but for now the authentication model is likely going to be around for quite some time because it is money the networks can safely count on.
Quote from: Utile et Dulce on December 14, 2012, 12:13:10 PM
It's the over-the-top part that kills you. Any one of the big players -- Microsoft with the XBox, Apple with AppleTV, Google with their smart TVs and set top boxes -- could pony up the money and technology to be the distributor of this any league.
For distribution, yes. But let's remember that's only half the equation. Cameras don't arrive at arenas and run themselves. That's why ESPN and NBC and Fox have been the big players so far. Because you need to have people on the ground to actually shoot and produce the broadcast. Just because someone can stream it doesn't mean a thing if you don't have a full compliment of people physically on the ground to produce the content to fill the stream.
Until those companies have their own traveling production crews that can provide cameramen, producers, and commentators for as many as 6-7 games per night across the country, you can't realistically think about them as your main broadcast partner.
Quote from: bamamarquettefan on December 14, 2012, 11:57:37 AM
i just hate going another 450 miles west when we consider the travel for non-revenue sports. i realize I'm doing a 180 since I originally thought Gonzaga was worth traveling too, but the more I think about it, the more I think that the conference gets us into the big eastern markets and I'm actually going all the way to the other extreme with VCU, but would still take Dayton over Creighton.
Both would be fine additions in my mind. How bout the C7 institute an 'entrance fee' and let the best man win?
Quote from: LauxForThree on December 14, 2012, 09:26:53 AM
Its a haul form LP, but I think the Mayor is adding a new EL stop near by. Getting more student involvement isnt my concern, if they are a winning program, then the lazy asses in Lincoln Park will come.
A near downtown location in my opinion has better appeal from a working alumni, corporate setting. And any new dedicated DePaul facility will be better than the crap at the Horizon. Plus, being closer to the South side may be beneficial from a recruiting standpoint.... that much easier for recruits and recruits family to see games.
The city is going to put a new stop on the green line at cermak. The red line (the line most students would be taking from campus) already has a stop on Cemak which is 2 blocks west of this new stop and 5 blocks west of the proposed stadium location. My understanding though is that the green line stop is going to be a temporary addition to the line to help facilitate traffic to the south side when the red line is shut down south of Cermak next May for the summer... But it is Chicago and temporary fixes tend to become permanent fixes pretty quickly in the City.
Also, outside of an on campus stadium this would be the most accesssible option for students using public transportation when compared to the United Center and Allstate Arena. Regarding the purchase of land near campus by DePaul, has the University released any information on what it intends to do with the land? I live in Lincoln Park and received a letter from the City awhile back informing residents of a community meeting concerning the permanent closing of a few streets near campus. Although this could mean a lot of different things (pedestrian mall, parking lots, academic buildings), could this be the stadium locale?
Quote from: macimaniacal19 on December 14, 2012, 01:18:16 PM
Regarding the purchase of land near campus by DePaul, has the University released any information on what it intends to do with the land? I live in Lincoln Park and received a letter from the City awhile back informing residents of a community meeting concerning the permanent closing of a few streets near campus. Although this could mean a lot of different things (pedestrian mall, parking lots, academic buildings), could this be the stadium locale?
The proposed street closures in Lincoln Park have to due with the creation of a pedestrian mall. Nothing in regards to a stadium.
Quote from: 79Warrior on December 14, 2012, 09:59:54 AM
Gonzaga would be a great choice. I just do not see it happening. This league will be for all sports. The Zags will have the worst travel situation for all their games in every sport. Costly and a major drag for student athletes.
If all the schools are
committed to playing High Major college basketball, I say adding Butler, Xavier and Creighton and merging with the WCC you create a 19 team league. Some of the weaker teams in the WCC are more or less no worse than the bottom 4 in the old Big East. USF has a storied basketball history which could be resurrected back to greatness. With 9 schools in the west and 9 in the east and Creighton in the middle it would mitigate travel costs for basketball and for all other sports there could be a east/west division with each school playing regular season in division and the top 2 in each division playing a championship round. If were going to compete with the 5 superconferences we have to be bigger and better. Again, only if their committed to playing High Major basketball.
Quote from: RJax55 on December 14, 2012, 01:23:56 PM
The proposed street closures in Lincoln Park have to due with the creation of a pedestrian mall. Nothing in regards to a stadium.
Now if only we could convince milwaukee to close Wisconsin between 12th and 16th
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 14, 2012, 12:28:02 PM
For distribution, yes. But let's remember that's only half the equation. Cameras don't arrive at arenas and run themselves. That's why ESPN and NBC and Fox have been the big players so far. Because you need to have people on the ground to actually shoot and produce the broadcast. Just because someone can stream it doesn't mean a thing if you don't have a full compliment of people physically on the ground to produce the content to fill the stream.
Until those companies have their own traveling production crews that can provide cameramen, producers, and commentators for as many as 6-7 games per night across the country, you can't realistically think about them as your main broadcast partner.
Very true. The technical hurdles are probably the easiest to get over. Camera crews probably aren't too tough (the BC has their own camera crew; I bet other places do as well), but the commentary and production are huge parts of the experience that don't come cheap.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 14, 2012, 12:25:50 PM
Now, think about that 85% of customers that have to pay for ESPN even if they can't stand sports, they're stuck paying it anyway....that's big money for ESPN. If they were to start selling it direct, perhaps to your connected television as you stated, now earn the wrath of many distributors that are paying them billions (like the Comcast example I gave), but they are also risking further dollars because the only people that are going to sign up directly for their service are sports fans. Ultimately, as the pendulum swings to that type of model, that $5 charge becomes more like $10 to $15 when the 85% that must pay for it now at a "lower price" becomes a much higher price when only 40% or 45% actually buy it.
And here they said communism was dead. Pshaw.
Quote from: muwarrior69 on December 14, 2012, 01:27:13 PM
If all the schools are committed to playing High Major college basketball, I say adding Butler, Xavier and Creighton and merging with the WCC you create a 19 team league. Some of the weaker teams in the WCC are more or less no worse than the bottom 4 in the old Big East. USF has a storied basketball history which could be resurrected back to greatness. With 9 schools in the west and 9 in the east and Creighton in the middle it would mitigate travel costs for basketball and for all other sports there could be a east/west division with each school playing regular season in division and the top 2 in each division playing a championship round. If were going to compete with the 5 superconferences we have to be bigger and better. Again, only if their committed to playing High Major basketball.
Pepperdine and Santa Clara are awful. Much worse than Depaul or any other Big East team. Loyola Marymount and Portland haven't been much better in recent years. And what USF did 50 years ago should have no bearing going forward. The bottom of the WCC is awful compared to the bottom of the Big East. Absolutely awful. Gonzaga and St. Mary's are the only two that have shown anything resembling the caliber of team we want in this league over the past 20 years.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 14, 2012, 01:42:48 PM
Pepperdine and Santa Clara are awful. Much worse than Depaul or any other Big East team. Loyola Marymount and Portland haven't been much better in recent years. And what USF did 50 years ago should have no bearing going forward. The bottom of the WCC is awful compared to the bottom of the Big East. Absolutely awful. Gonzaga and St. Mary's are the only two that have shown anything resembling the caliber of team we want in this league over the past 20 years.
Agreed. There is a reason that Gonzaga's strategy over the last several years has been to schedule the toughest out-of-conference schedule possible -- a "we'll play anyone, anywhere" approach. It's because their conference is absolutely horrible. Their situation is the opposite of what Marquette's has been. We play cup cakes and then watch as our RPI rises once we get into the conference schedule -- even if we lose some games. They try to schedule strong out-of-conference games and then watch as their RPI drops once they get into their conference schedule -- even if they run the table. It is not a strong conference. Why else would they even consider joining a conference in which the nearest team is 1500 miles away (assuming, of course, that they would consider joining).
In my opinion, merging with the WCC would be an absolute disaster. Maybe the original post was supposed to be teal.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 14, 2012, 01:42:48 PM
Pepperdine and Santa Clara are awful. Much worse than Depaul or any other Big East team.
Does that include Tulane? ;D
I would like to see a C7-WCC merger that doesn't include basketball. Wishful thinking, but that conference would be awesome for soccer and cross country, especially if ND came back.
Quote from: mikekinsellaMVP on December 14, 2012, 02:00:41 PM
I would like to see a C7-WCC merger that doesn't include basketball. Wishful thinking, but that conference would be awesome for soccer and cross country, especially if ND came back.
What would the point of that be??? The reason you bring in schools like Gonzaga is for the value they bring to your television contract. Sending our student athletes around the country is one thing if they have basketball money to show for it...sending them around the country because Pepperdine is good at soccer really isn't.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 14, 2012, 10:13:07 AM
I would also add that most of the data we are seeing as an industry is showing the the TV dominates, absolutely dominates viewing habits. Sure, the use of video on smart phones and tablets has increased considerably, but not at the expense of the television. In preference study after preference study, people would rather view their content on a large tv than PC, Tablet, Smartphone. As such, how many people will throw dollars down to watch live sports that can be consumed on a small device that also has to deal with buffering, bandwidth connection, etc vs an appliance they turn on and it's just there.
What do you think this will look like in 10 years? I just can't see the traditional cable/network distribution plan staying in place.
DVR, streaming video, tablets, phones, etc. Think of all of the content distribution changes in the past 10 years. Now imagine what it will look like 10 years from now.
Sports are a different animal than other programming. For MU and Packers Games, I watch them live and don't change the channel during commercials. I also prefer watching on a TV because I want to share the experience with people around me. For other TV, I either watch On Demand or DVRed shows and I fast forward through commercials. Below is a good article about how sports fans are irrational about watching games.
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6626431/space-time-dvr-mechanics
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on December 14, 2012, 02:45:26 PM
I just can't see the traditional cable/network distribution plan staying in place.
Neither can the analysts who follow Google and Apple.
currently every team that is not Gonzaga, St. Mary's, or BYU in WCC is worse than every single current big east team, via kenpom.
ESPN is ESPN. They bring along ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPN3. Nobody else has anything like it. Of course that's where we want to be if we -- especially those of us who live far away from Milwaukee -- really want to see most of our games.
Quote from: MU82 on December 14, 2012, 04:41:48 PM
ESPN is ESPN. They bring along ESPN2, ESPNU and ESPN3. Nobody else has anything like it. Of course that's where we want to be if we -- especially those of us who live far away from Milwaukee -- really want to see most of our games.
Think BIGGER.
ESPN didn't always have those stations, and they were kind of a joke at first (remember "the deuce")
The current model of distribution is going to change drastically in the next 10 years. Don't get concerned about the network letters, but rather the $, and the long-term vision of distribution.
Quote from: LittleMurs on December 14, 2012, 09:20:36 AM
Here's a hot potato out of the blue for you to handle. Is Lenti-Ponsetto the problem?
Yes!!!!!
+1 gadzillion
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on December 14, 2012, 04:45:43 PM
Think BIGGER.
ESPN didn't always have those stations, and they were kind of a joke at first (remember "the deuce")
The current model of distribution is going to change drastically in the next 10 years. Don't get concerned about the network letters, but rather the $, and the long-term vision of distribution.
Are we talking about paperview? It works with boxing and MMA. Or are thinking bigger like new league only station. Or making money off a conference website that streams all games, that way the conference keeps all the money.
Quote from: BagpipingBoxer on December 14, 2012, 10:43:54 PM
Are we talking about paperview? It works with boxing and MMA. Or are thinking bigger like new league only station. Or making money off a conference website that streams all games, that way the conference keeps all the money.
Well, for now, obviously ESPN and B10 network are the most powerful college basketball distribution networks.
My only point is, the distribution game is evolving quickly. IMO, the new conf. can't concern itself so much with the letters of the network they go with, but rather the long term ramifications and opportunities of the deal they make.
I don't think that means PPV, or the conf. creating it's own traditional network, but, landing on the 4 letter network isn't absolutely necessary. NBC sport would be fine, and maybe a partnership to show the games online as well. They can and should think outside of the box on this one. This conference is different than any other, and should act as such.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on December 14, 2012, 02:45:26 PM
What do you think this will look like in 10 years? I just can't see the traditional cable/network distribution plan staying in place.
DVR, streaming video, tablets, phones, etc. Think of all of the content distribution changes in the past 10 years. Now imagine what it will look like 10 years from now.
It still comes down to rights ownership. It's really simple, you're making it too hard. All the new gadgets are a means to an end, but doesn't change the rights ownership. If you carve it up too much, you're going to potentially screw yourself. These leagues and networks want guaranteed revenues that can be counted on, and sports (live sports) is the one thing that people want to watch on a tv screen more than anything else.
If a network that does these deals isn't controlling the digital rights and consquently the distributor, then they aren't worth a damn. All those rights are going to be lumped in together. If they aren't, then the dollars are going to be crap and not worth it to the conferences. Simple as that. No different than the deals we do with NFL for NFL Sunday Ticket, MLB, NASCAR, etc. You aren't going to write a huge check to ESPN or NBC or the Big Ten for tv rights if they, in turn, are going to sell digital rights for other ways to distribute the product. Every distributor worth a hill of beans will tell them to pound sand. Then you have a big problem because those other avenues can't generate the same amount of money. So you either cut a really lame deal and get small dollars and hope to make up the rest with these other digital rights, or you sell them all through and get real dollars and not worry about the rest. Most conferences and teams don't want to worry about the rest, and rightly so.
In the meantime, the technology will continue to change, there will be more and better ways to consume the product.....WHO OWNS THE RIGHTS is the key. Not how you consume, but what you are able to consume and at what price.
Quote from: Guns n Ammo on December 14, 2012, 04:45:43 PM
Think BIGGER.
ESPN didn't always have those stations, and they were kind of a joke at first (remember "the deuce")
The current model of distribution is going to change drastically in the next 10 years. Don't get concerned about the network letters, but rather the $, and the long-term vision of distribution.
Just as MU needs to think only about MU in its role in all these conference issues, my MU alum wife and I need to think only about ourselves. We want a network affiliation that allows us to watch as many games as possible -- next season, 5 years from now and 20 years from now.
If NBCSportsNet televises 10 MU games and has a system in place that lets us watch the rest on a laptop we can hook up to our 50 inch plasma, that's fine. If it televises 6 and has a lousy internet service, that's not fine and we'd MUCH rather have ESPN. The New Fun Hoops Conference can leave ESPN for its next contract if NBC or somebody else has something better in place then.
Yes, it's all about us. We want to watch our Warriors. We ARE Mar-quette!