Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
ACC ACC ACC
Comments
-
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football? -
rodmansrage said:
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football?
I’m extremely skeptical that cable companies are seriously gorging NJ and NYC customers because of Rutgers’ preserve in the Big 10, even if the Big Ten dreamed that would happen when they invited Rutgers. There would have to be some interest in the region to justify raising carriage fees. (Unless you think if the Big Ten added Rice, then Houston cable providers would suddenly be willing to charge their customers out their ears.)
And since Washington has more people than Maryland, wouldn’t Washington bring more cable households than Maryland does? -
rodmansrage said:
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football?
I am extremely skeptical of the idea that cable companies are seriously gorging NYC and NJ customers because of Rutger’s presence in the Big Ten, even though I’m sure that was the Big Ten’s dream when they invited Rutgers. There has to be at least some minimal interest in a local team in order to justify raising carriage fees. (Unless you seriously think that if the Big Ten invited Rice, then Houston cable providers would suddenly start gorging customers for the BTN.)
And since the state of Washington actually had more people than Maryland, wouldn’t Washington actually bring more cable subscriptions to the BTN than Maryland does? -
you're shocked cable companies are gorging their customer base?!?!?! im sure the rest of your poast was great, or maybe it sucked, irregardless its a mute point because i stopped reading after the bold.Sandra6 said:rodmansrage said:
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football?
I am extremely skeptical of the idea that cable companies are seriously gorging NYC and NJ customers because of Rutger’s presence in the Big Ten, even though I’m sure that was the Big Ten’s dream when they invited Rutgers. There has to be at least some minimal interest in a local team in order to justify raising carriage fees. (Unless you seriously think that if the Big Ten invited Rice, then Houston cable providers would suddenly start gorging customers for the BTN.)
And since the state of Washington actually had more people than Maryland, wouldn’t Washington actually bring more cable subscriptions to the BTN than Maryland does? -
The B12 lost their 2 biggest dogs.BleachedAnusDawg said:
PAC and Big 12 merge, East/West divisions. Much better than doing an ACC thing.dnc said:
Buy our way in, wtf? They'd take us in a heartbeat. So far we have resisted the idea because the vast majority of that conference sucks ass.LebamDawg said:https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-eyes-further-conference-expansion-after-reaching-early-exit-agreement-with-texas-oklahoma/
Maybe we? could buy our way into the B12 since they want to expand...
especially after this bombshell of no TV contract https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/104349/its-not-over-for-the-pac-10#latest
You can't call yourself a power football conference without one blue blood.
Washington needs to step up to the plate. Time to Be the big Dawg -
Rutgers and Maryland aren't just about their respective literal geographic borders. It's the East Coast media markets they are a part of which are much bigger. Pretending otherwise is like pretending UConn basketball is only relevant in Connecticut.Sandra6 said:rodmansrage said:
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football?
I am extremely skeptical of the idea that cable companies are seriously gorging NYC and NJ customers because of Rutger’s presence in the Big Ten, even though I’m sure that was the Big Ten’s dream when they invited Rutgers. There has to be at least some minimal interest in a local team in order to justify raising carriage fees. (Unless you seriously think that if the Big Ten invited Rice, then Houston cable providers would suddenly start gorging customers for the BTN.)
And since the state of Washington actually had more people than Maryland, wouldn’t Washington actually bring more cable subscriptions to the BTN than Maryland does? -
UW_Doog_Bot said:
Rutgers and Maryland aren't just about their respective literal geographic borders. It's the East Coast media markets they are a part of which are much bigger. Pretending otherwise is like pretending UConn basketball is only relevant in Connecticut.Sandra6 said:rodmansrage said:
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football?
I am extremely skeptical of the idea that cable companies are seriously gorging NYC and NJ customers because of Rutger’s presence in the Big Ten, even though I’m sure that was the Big Ten’s dream when they invited Rutgers. There has to be at least some minimal interest in a local team in order to justify raising carriage fees. (Unless you seriously think that if the Big Ten invited Rice, then Houston cable providers would suddenly start gorging customers for the BTN.)
And since the state of Washington actually had more people than Maryland, wouldn’t Washington actually bring more cable subscriptions to the BTN than Maryland does?
You really think Rutgers and Maryland are relevant outside Maryland and NJ? They’re barely even relevant in Maryland and NJ, forget about outside those states.
People in NYC really look down on NJ for in case you’re not aware-it’s pretty bizarre that anybody would think New Yorkers would seriously root for the state university of New Jersey. -
That's why Oregon and UW join the B12. Both are higher ceilings than what they've got in football but the B12 offers a higher floor than the P12. TCU, Baylor, KState, UC, UCF, Houston, all recently offer better football than Colorado, WSU, Stan, Cal, UA. Basketball money is substantially better in the B12 as well. 6-9 teams in the tournament every year> 2-4. Kansas,Texas Tech and Oregon State all seem to be on the upswing in football and ASU is a mystery. Utah is the only consistently redeeming thing outside the NW in the P12 and that says all you need about "our" brand. GTFO sooner than later.Doogles said:
The B12 lost their 2 biggest dogs.BleachedAnusDawg said:
PAC and Big 12 merge, East/West divisions. Much better than doing an ACC thing.dnc said:
Buy our way in, wtf? They'd take us in a heartbeat. So far we have resisted the idea because the vast majority of that conference sucks ass.LebamDawg said:https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/big-12-eyes-further-conference-expansion-after-reaching-early-exit-agreement-with-texas-oklahoma/
Maybe we? could buy our way into the B12 since they want to expand...
especially after this bombshell of no TV contract https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/104349/its-not-over-for-the-pac-10#latest
You can't call yourself a power football conference without one blue blood.
Washington needs to step up to the plate. Time to Be the big Dawg -
Except the B1G is relevant in the markets they’re in. B1G programming is constantly on in bars in the DC Metro. ACC content? Only when it’s on ESPN nationally.Sandra6 said:UW_Doog_Bot said:
Rutgers and Maryland aren't just about their respective literal geographic borders. It's the East Coast media markets they are a part of which are much bigger. Pretending otherwise is like pretending UConn basketball is only relevant in Connecticut.Sandra6 said:rodmansrage said:
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football?
I am extremely skeptical of the idea that cable companies are seriously gorging NYC and NJ customers because of Rutger’s presence in the Big Ten, even though I’m sure that was the Big Ten’s dream when they invited Rutgers. There has to be at least some minimal interest in a local team in order to justify raising carriage fees. (Unless you seriously think that if the Big Ten invited Rice, then Houston cable providers would suddenly start gorging customers for the BTN.)
And since the state of Washington actually had more people than Maryland, wouldn’t Washington actually bring more cable subscriptions to the BTN than Maryland does?
You really think Rutgers and Maryland are relevant outside Maryland and NJ? They’re barely even relevant in Maryland and NJ, forget about outside those states.
People in NYC really look down on NJ for in case you’re not aware-it’s pretty bizarre that anybody would think New Yorkers would seriously root for the state university of New Jersey. -
whlinder said:
Except the B1G is relevant in the markets they’re in. B1G programming is constantly on in bars in the DC Metro. ACC content? Only when it’s on ESPN nationally.Sandra6 said:UW_Doog_Bot said:
Rutgers and Maryland aren't just about their respective literal geographic borders. It's the East Coast media markets they are a part of which are much bigger. Pretending otherwise is like pretending UConn basketball is only relevant in Connecticut.Sandra6 said:rodmansrage said:
thats basically what happened, neither of those programs have a football program worth a shit. but, you could get the big 10 network on those cable providers, those cable providers would charge their customers, and then those cable providers could raise their carriage fees. same with adding buttgers, they suck, but you bring in the big 10 network into ny/nj/philly population.Sandra6 said:
PS Even if you go by some mindless "tv market" perspective, Washington is a more populated state than Maryland. And that's before you even consider how nobody in Maryland gives a shit about Maryland football.
to the bolded point, as mentioned above, i agree, but does anyone in the state of washington give a shit about washington football?
I am extremely skeptical of the idea that cable companies are seriously gorging NYC and NJ customers because of Rutger’s presence in the Big Ten, even though I’m sure that was the Big Ten’s dream when they invited Rutgers. There has to be at least some minimal interest in a local team in order to justify raising carriage fees. (Unless you seriously think that if the Big Ten invited Rice, then Houston cable providers would suddenly start gorging customers for the BTN.)
And since the state of Washington actually had more people than Maryland, wouldn’t Washington actually bring more cable subscriptions to the BTN than Maryland does?
You really think Rutgers and Maryland are relevant outside Maryland and NJ? They’re barely even relevant in Maryland and NJ, forget about outside those states.
People in NYC really look down on NJ for in case you’re not aware-it’s pretty bizarre that anybody would think New Yorkers would seriously root for the state university of New Jersey.
Need more ACC content.
