Quote from: #UnleashMalik on Today at 11:18:46 AMWeighing down does not equal holding back. Use the words i used please.

Ben and chase absolutely weighed the other starters down, causing them to do more work, be better, and make plays.

Now that we don't have kam magic, koleks play making, and oso's paint work we now see the holes these two create.

That's a pretty comparable saying. If that's the best you've got you're being pedantic.

If your argument is that Chase wasn't an all American, second team all conference, or sixth man of the year then sure he held the others back. Of course that's a ridiculous argument as you need effective role players and he was just that. Able to explode occasionally so he kept defenses honest, he had a couple very clutch moments, and he was never lost out there with the starters. Your argument is like looking at the NBA champs and being upset that every single one of the starters and the 6th man aren't all stars.

Gold I'll give you. Should've said that from the get go.

Quote from: Heisenberg on Today at 10:25:30 AMIt actually happens a lot, see Jay Jay Wright ...

In his 8th year, 2008/2009, Nova made the Final Four.

They then had a three-year slide:

2009–10, 25–8
2010–11, 21–12
2011–12, 13–19


Recall that fans were so pissed at Wright that VU Hoops (their MUScoop) promoted stories he was going to resign over a sex scandal involving a student. It was completely unfounded, but a symptom that the fan base wanted him gone.

Fans said he "could not coach" and was only a "recruiter." (The same was said about Wojo.)

Interestingly, 2012 is now viewed by Nova fans as the "hiccup" that saved the program. Wright used the failure to "course-correct," moving away from chasing high-profile NBA prospects and focusing on "culture" and four-year players. This shift led directly to the arrival of the Ryan Arcidiacono class and the most successful run in program history.

They won two Nattys (2016 and 2018), and made another final four (2022).

---

Maybe this year's failure will be Shaka's "course-correct" where he starts using the portal and engaging with agents.

Good post.

Quote from: #UnleashMalik on Today at 11:18:46 AMBen and chase absolutely weighed the other starters down, causing them to do more work, be better, and make plays.

Nah.

Impressive.

Quote from: Galway Eagle on Today at 09:57:53 AMLmao this is a ridiculous take. Chase was a pretty impressive freshman, sophomore and junior.

He hasn't taken the jump to be an effective alpha dog and that sucks but now to act like he and be. Held us back these past two years (one of which was a 2 seed) is idiotic.

Chase was impressive, as a complimentary player.  Ben has always been a nice complimentary player.  Towards the end of last year when Kam was getting shut down neither was the kind of consistent presence that should have left anyone confident about this year.  Now, with the focus on Chase it seems obvious he cannot carry the team.  Ben's shooting is just a disaster.

Quote from: GoldenEagles03 on Today at 12:06:56 PMDisagree.

Imagine we don't start every game in a 5 to 7 point hole? Would be awesome.

-5 in Caedin's brief 4 minutes on Tuesday. It doesn't have to be like this.

And usually 2 or 3 quick fouls which gets the opponent closer to the bonus

Much preferred to the current uniforms.

Quote from: MU82 on Today at 11:51:54 AMIf Gold is gonna be sent into the game just 2 minutes after the tip and then plays 30-35 minutes, it doesn't matter.

Disagree.

Imagine we don't start every game in a 5 to 7 point hole? Would be awesome.

-5 in Caedin's brief 4 minutes on Tuesday. It doesn't have to be like this.

Quote from: MU82 on Today at 11:51:54 AMIf Gold is gonna be sent into the game just 2 minutes after the tip and then plays 30-35 minutes, it doesn't matter.

It only rewards mediocrity (actually less than mediocrity) and shows a real stubbornness by our coach.  If I'm a player on this team worth anything, it may be a reason to enter the portal as well.  I know as a parent of James and Stevens I'd be saying "WTF? Is he doing".  Other than that you are right, rather have Ben play 35 min rather than Caedin. 

Quote from: Heisenberg on January 05, 2026, 09:33:14 PMFrom a recent report
(Also, keep in mind Disney's stock is unchanged over the last 10 years, while the S&P 500 is up over 300%.)
---
ESPN is currently navigating a "perfect storm" of structural shifts in the media landscape. After decades of being the "infinite money glitch" for Disney, the network is now facing a difficult transition from the highly profitable cable bundle to a more fragmented and expensive streaming world.

As of early 2026, here are the primary business struggles facing ESPN:

1. The "Cable Trap" & Shrinking Reach
For decades, ESPN received a "carriage fee" (roughly $9+ per month) from every cable subscriber, whether they watched sports or not.

Subscriber Loss: Since 2013, ESPN has lost approximately 40 million cable households. This "cord-cutting" removes the guaranteed revenue that allowed them to outbid everyone for sports rights.

Cannibalization Risk: Launching their full direct-to-consumer (DTC) service, ESPN Unlimited (at $29.99/mo), risk accelerating the death of the cable bundle, as fans no longer need a cable subscription to see the "Big 4" sports.

2. The Sports Rights "Arms Race"
The cost of keeping premium sports is skyrocketing just as ESPN's primary revenue source (cable fees) is shrinking.

The $76 Billion NBA Deal: In late 2025, a massive 11-year NBA deal kicked in. While ESPN retained rights, the price tag was astronomical, and they now have to share the "spoils" with deep-pocketed tech giants like Amazon and NBC/Peacock.

Tech Disruption: Apple and Amazon do not need their sports divisions to be profitable—they use sports to sell iPhones and Prime memberships. ESPN, however, must be profitable, making it harder to compete in bidding wars.

3. The "ESPN Bet" Stagnation
To find new revenue, ESPN partnered with Penn Entertainment to launch ESPN Bet. However, the venture has struggled to gain traction:

Market Share: As of late 2025, ESPN Bet held only about 3.2% to 3.9% of the U.S. market, far behind leaders like FanDuel (35%) and DraftKings (37%).

Termination Clause: Disney has a clause allowing them to exit the partnership after year three (late 2026) if performance targets aren't met. Investors are increasingly skeptical that the brand name alone can overcome the "first-mover advantage" of its rivals.

4. Technical and Brand Confusion
The transition to streaming has created "identity" issues for the consumer:

ESPN+ vs. ESPN Unlimited: For years, consumers were frustrated that ESPN+ didn't include the main Monday Night Football or NBA games. The new ESPN Unlimited (DTC) aims to fix this, but at $30/month, it is one of the most expensive streaming services on the market.

Venu Sports Collapse: The failure of the "Venu Sports" joint venture (which would have bundled ESPN, Fox, and Warner Bros content) in early 2025 left ESPN to go it alone, placing even more pressure on their solo flagship app to succeed.

Quote from: Heisenberg on January 05, 2026, 09:33:14 PMFrom a recent report
(Also, keep in mind Disney's stock is unchanged over the last 10 years, while the S&P 500 is up over 300%.)
---
ESPN is currently navigating a "perfect storm" of structural shifts in the media landscape. After decades of being the "infinite money glitch" for Disney, the network is now facing a difficult transition from the highly profitable cable bundle to a more fragmented and expensive streaming world.

As of early 2026, here are the primary business struggles facing ESPN:

1. The "Cable Trap" & Shrinking Reach
For decades, ESPN received a "carriage fee" (roughly $9+ per month) from every cable subscriber, whether they watched sports or not.

Subscriber Loss: Since 2013, ESPN has lost approximately 40 million cable households. This "cord-cutting" removes the guaranteed revenue that allowed them to outbid everyone for sports rights.

Cannibalization Risk: Launching their full direct-to-consumer (DTC) service, ESPN Unlimited (at $29.99/mo), risk accelerating the death of the cable bundle, as fans no longer need a cable subscription to see the "Big 4" sports.

2. The Sports Rights "Arms Race"
The cost of keeping premium sports is skyrocketing just as ESPN's primary revenue source (cable fees) is shrinking.

The $76 Billion NBA Deal: In late 2025, a massive 11-year NBA deal kicked in. While ESPN retained rights, the price tag was astronomical, and they now have to share the "spoils" with deep-pocketed tech giants like Amazon and NBC/Peacock.

Tech Disruption: Apple and Amazon do not need their sports divisions to be profitable—they use sports to sell iPhones and Prime memberships. ESPN, however, must be profitable, making it harder to compete in bidding wars.

3. The "ESPN Bet" Stagnation
To find new revenue, ESPN partnered with Penn Entertainment to launch ESPN Bet. However, the venture has struggled to gain traction:

Market Share: As of late 2025, ESPN Bet held only about 3.2% to 3.9% of the U.S. market, far behind leaders like FanDuel (35%) and DraftKings (37%).

Termination Clause: Disney has a clause allowing them to exit the partnership after year three (late 2026) if performance targets aren't met. Investors are increasingly skeptical that the brand name alone can overcome the "first-mover advantage" of its rivals.

4. Technical and Brand Confusion
The transition to streaming has created "identity" issues for the consumer:

ESPN+ vs. ESPN Unlimited: For years, consumers were frustrated that ESPN+ didn't include the main Monday Night Football or NBA games. The new ESPN Unlimited (DTC) aims to fix this, but at $30/month, it is one of the most expensive streaming services on the market.

Venu Sports Collapse: The failure of the "Venu Sports" joint venture (which would have bundled ESPN, Fox, and Warner Bros content) in early 2025 left ESPN to go it alone, placing even more pressure on their solo flagship app to succeed.

So ... not "dying" at all. Thanks!