Have you LOL'd at washington today?

[7Samurai13]

I get ID and AMC without the BTN network. You'll also see more people here streaming TWD etc on Hulu etc... The only way I may even have BTN would be if it's a part of the PAC network package which is national and has nothing to do with Rutgers.NY fan bases will turn on the beloved Yankees here. If they are having a down year. As well as the Giants, Rangers..... Most people here don't even know who Rutgers is anymore. If they are making any money it's not due to Rutgers.

Do you live in southern New York? BTN is also a national network but it is the difference between .48 a month vs 1.04 a month for out of market vs in market. Again stop thinking it's about fans. It has nothing to do with fans. It has nothing to do with anyone actually turning the game on. In Michigan I can get a 10 channel plan, no BigTen network, as soon as I go to a 100 channel plan (the next biggest plan), it's in there. So every month I go with the 100 channel or higher plan, whether I turn that channel on or not, I am paying $1 for the BigTen network. TV ad revenue is effected by actual viewership. But again, 8 million TV plans went from out of network to in network and are spending an extra .56 a month for the channel, whether they want it or not, whether they watch it or not.

Again it has NOTHING to do with actual fans watching the game. Is it that difficult of a concept?

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Beat me to it. This is your answer.

I'm going to guess neither of you have been to NY Youve got a higher chance of Oregon winning a natty. Than finding a substantial amount of people to buy a sports package for Rutgers

 

[TheDayMan]

I'll say this again, the scheduling of Rutgers was a weak ass move by a combo of weak ass leaders at UW that no longer are there. It's really that simple.

Sure, Rutgers was a little better than they are now, but UW was still trying to get past the 6-7 win mark and not looking to schedule real competition in lieu of padding non meaning wins. They didn't have a championship mentality and it showed on and off the field. There was no concern over what that schedule would mean to a playoff committee because they weren't forward thinking enough to imagine they would be this good. And they wouldn't have been had Sark and Woodward stayed as a combo. If Woodward was still here with Petersen there is little doubt they would be working as hard as Cohen is on getting more meat on that table.

Sark had no penis and we are paying the price for it this year and last season.

There is no need to make Rutgers or their selection appear better than it was. Doesn't change things anyway.

I agree with all of this, I mean, it's correct, so there's no way to disagree with it. This whole thing is just based off me stating the irony that it only seems to be big 10 fans who can't get over UW scheduling Rutgers.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Do you live in southern New York? BTN is also a national network but it is the difference between .48 a month vs 1.04 a month for out of market vs in market. Again stop thinking it's about fans. It has nothing to do with fans. It has nothing to do with anyone actually turning the game on. In Michigan I can get a 10 channel plan, no BigTen network, as soon as I go to a 100 channel plan (the next biggest plan), it's in there. So every month I go with the 100 channel or higher plan, whether I turn that channel on or not, I am paying $1 for the BigTen network. TV ad revenue is effected by actual viewership. But again, 8 million TV plans went from out of network to in network and are spending an extra .56 a month for the channel, whether they want it or not, whether they watch it or not.

Again it has NOTHING to do with actual fans watching the game. Is it that difficult of a concept?

I've lived in northern and southern NY. Always had AMC and ID without BTN. The only way I'm getting BTN is if it's part of the play station package. And that I got for the PAC network not Rutgers

 

[7Samurai13]

You sure? Is it a stretch to force the network into that market for an in state team?

Regardless, I feel like you're still missing the point, which was, okay, you win, it was only for the tv deal, not a sports move, I get it, but that didn't change that they still had something more going for them at the time. Even if you hated the move, did anyone expect they'd be the worst P5 team in a few years? They were expected to be average, with some potential.

The TV markets are pretty much divided up and aren't really that fluid I don't believe.

Yes they were expecting a decent team and what they got was a complete piece of dog shit that brings an additional $54+ million a year.

 

[7Samurai13]

I've lived in northern and southern NY. Always had AMC and ID without BTN. The only way I'm getting BTN is if it's part of the play station package. And that I got for the PAC network not Rutgers

Why do you think that the PAC12 network is by far the worst profitable college sports network while the BigTen is so profitable despite the fact that the PAC owns their TV network and the abogTen has to split their TV network profits?

 

[WizardHawk]

I agree with all of this, I mean, it's correct, so there's no way to disagree with it. This whole thing is just based of me stating the irony that it only seems to be big 10 fans who can't get over UW scheduling Rutgers.

It's not that they can't get over the scheduling of them, it's their hangup on only hanging 30 on them as some greater thing than it was. Opening game on the road across the country in another timezone against a team with a new staff and new schemes not already on tape anywhere and with a lot of young kids they were trying different things out with.

All some of these idiots ever see is scores without context. Football is played in a vacuum to them. Leave them to their ignorance.

 

[7Samurai13]

Syracuse and Army actually have a bigger following here. Syracuse mostly upstate and with basketball. Army football is a tradition. But we get those games free

IT'S NOT ABOUT FANS OR FOLLOWERS YOU DENSE FUCK!!!!

 

[WizardHawk]

Why do you think that the PAC12 network is by far the worst profitable college sports network while the BigTen is so profitable despite the fact that the PAC owns their TV network and the abogTen has to split their TV network profits?

Because Larry Scott is a fucking pathetic moron?

 

[wazzu31]

I'll say this again, the scheduling of Rutgers was a weak ass move by a combo of weak ass leaders at UW that no longer are there. It's really that simple.

Sure, Rutgers was a little better than they are now, but UW was still trying to get past the 6-7 win mark and not looking to schedule real competition in lieu of padding non meaning wins. They didn't have a championship mentality and it showed on and off the field. There was no concern over what that schedule would mean to a playoff committee because they weren't forward thinking enough to imagine they would be this good. And they wouldn't have been had Sark and Woodward stayed as a combo. If Woodward was still here with Petersen there is little doubt they would be working as hard as Cohen is on getting more meat on that table.

Sark had no penis and we are paying the price for it this year and last season.

There is no need to make Rutgers or their selection appear better than it was. Doesn't change things anyway.

Was it weak, of course. But out west we are at a huge disadvantage when it comes to scheduling as opposed to the rest of conferences. We have more parody in the Pac 12 which regardless of our OCC is harder to run through our conference unscathed. As well as, outside of USC now, essentially any big named opponent is going to be neutral site game for the big payday or you have to play there first then get bought out.

The best thing would be for the AD's to come together, make each conference have the same number of members and either all go 9 conference games or 8. Then set up rotating OOC games like Pac12 vs B1G one year then SEC teams the next plus the body bag game against a FCS school in the preseason none of this FCS BS in November.

 

[7Samurai13]

It's not that they can't get over the scheduling of them, it's their hangup on only hanging 30 on them as some greater thing than it was. Opening game on the road across the country in another timezone against a team with a new staff and new schemes not already on tape anywhere and with a lot of young kids they were trying different things out with.

All some of these idiots ever see is scores without context. Football is played in a vacuum to them. Leave them to their ignorance.

I have called them out for it several times and there are several people who have. But you think the more you say something it all of the sudden it becomes true. The PAC10 brought in a bottom dweller from the Big12 in Colorado who has only been bowl eligible once since going to the PAC12. I don't see people harping about bringing one of the five worst P5 teams in college football into the conference.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

Why do you think that the PAC12 network is by far the worst profitable college sports network while the BigTen is so profitable despite the fact that the PAC owns their TV network and the abogTen has to split their TV network profits?

I know it's not because the PAC added Rutgers for their "tv market". Being serious I was born in NY. I live in NY have almost my whole life. I can turn AMC and ID on now if I want. And you won't see BTN on my tv listing. If anyone in this market is ordering BTN. There is a much larger change they are a fan of OSU, UM etc... or a team in another conference. Not due to Rutgers

 

[WizardHawk]

Was it weak, of course. But out west we are at a huge disadvantage when it comes to scheduling as opposed to the rest of conferences. We have more parody in the Pac 12 which regardless of our OCC is harder to run through our conference unscathed. As well as, outside of USC now, essentially any big named opponent is going to be neutral site game for the big payday or you have to play there first then get bought out.

The best thing would be for the AD's to come together, make each conference have the same number of members and either all go 9 conference games or 8. Then set up rotating OOC games like Pac12 vs B1G one year then SEC teams the next plus the body bag game against a FCS school in the preseason none of this FCS BS in November.

Well, be careful calling our conference parody as some will take you up on that and agree.

I kid, I know you meant parity.

Our disadvantage is travel. It's much easier for teams to make H/H with other conferences that neighbor them. The Pac is a long travel for everyone else in the country and a huge travel for our fans to go there.

But teams find ways of getting things better than Rutgers are your supposed P5 marquee game.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

IT'S NOT ABOUT FANS OR FOLLOWERS YOU DENSE FUCK!!!!

It's not about cable packages or AMC etc as you claim....Turn your tv on and check your NY channel listings

 

[WizardHawk]

I have called them out for it several times and there are several people who have. But you think the more you say something it all of the sudden it becomes true. The PAC10 brought in a bottom dweller from the Big12 in Colorado who has only been bowl eligible once since going to the PAC12. I don't see people harping about bringing one of the five worst P5 teams in college football into the conference.

First of all, I don't recall mentioning you specifically in that comment. There are of course more reasonable fans of B1G teams and in fact probably more reasonable ones than idiots. Just like most bases up here.

Second, a lot of our fans were bitching literally every year about both Colorado and Utah for various reasons. Personally I'd rather have stayed at 10 and faced every team every year like we did for decades, but that's me. It's not like Colorado never had any history though.

 

[Wamu]

I'm going to guess neither of you have been to NY Youve got a higher chance of Oregon winning a natty. Than finding a substantial amount of people to buy a sports package for Rutgers

I've been to Syracuse once. Went to the Carrier Dome back in the late 80's for a Syracuse/Georgetown game.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

I've been to Syracuse once. Went to the Carrier Dome back in the late 80's for a Syracuse/Georgetown game.

It's actually a great venue. Army is an amazing venue if you ever get a chance to go to a game. West Point sits right near the Hudson River. And the pre game traditions are absolutely amazing. Well worth it

 

[Wamu]

It's actually a great venue. Army is an amazing venue if you ever get a chance to go to a game. West Point sits right near the Hudson River. And the pre game traditions are absolutely amazing. Well worth it

I doubt if I ever make it back to any place in New York. I don't even wanna go down to Denver, let alone across the country.

 

[TheRobotDevil]

I doubt if I ever make it back to any place in New York. I don't even wanna go down to Denver, let alone across the country.

I may hit Denver again next year. Not sure yet already made plans to hit Texas for the SC game next year. Always wanted to catch a game there

 

[TheDayMan]

I have called them out for it several times and there are several people who have. But you think the more you say something it all of the sudden it becomes true. The PAC10 brought in a bottom dweller from the Big12 in Colorado who has only been bowl eligible once since going to the PAC12. I don't see people harping about bringing one of the five worst P5 teams in college football into the conference.

You have, I don't think anyone is trying to talk shit to you. Colorado has some history that Rutgers is lacking, I'm pretty sure would be the justification. And to be fair, while mostly being a doormat, they played for the conference title last year, Rutgers has a ways to go if you want to compare the moves on the sports, rather than financial side. But like wiz said, most fans of Pac teams felt about expanding with the two teams probably the same as you feel about Rutgers.

Conference expansion is a nasty whore.