Recent Comments

It's really the same as your newsfeed w Lebron fans. Mine is filled with Lebron hating Kobe fans, or "whoever is playing Lebron" fans.

"When I saw his name on the phone caller ID last week, I just picked up the phone and said, 'So, what, you want me to send you a double-double overnight?' Miller recalled.

Why haven't I thought of that!!! Genius. Time to call my Hokie friends that live in CA.

I have to agree with Fireman here. Streaming is more convenient from a location/time/price perspective, but from an end-user perspective, television is definitely a more refined product.

That being said, I'd rather pay $40 for internet and $10 for my assorted streaming services and just go to a bar every Saturday than spend the $200/month that my parents do. I also think that the ACC has the opportunity to get ahead of the game and develop something really innovative (though I'm not hopeful).

Edit: I live by myself, and travel 25%-75% for work, so it really doesn't make sense to have cable.

But then how much are you spending at the bar 4 days a week.

Bar down the street from me has $3 Sweetwater IPAs all day everyday, so I'm set.

Plus I don't have to deal with people cheering for other teams or trying to listen to the VT game when Ole Miss is playing LSU or something.

I kinda enjoy this atmosphere. If I'm too hungover to deal with it I'll either stream the game from home, or I'll go over to friend's house. There's probably 1-2 weekends/year that I wish I had cable.

It's pretty much a dead city as far as development and things to do. All of the downtown is owned by the furniture companies because Furniture Market is so profitable, but there's nothing going on there outside of those few weeks twice a year.

While I'd agree Texas has the following to go independent successfully (a la Notre "we've got the rest of college football by the balls" Dame), do you think the playoff structure can absorb that, given that they claim that conference championships matter?

I need to comb back through the list and run the numbers on how many people voted for a game despite being in school for another one.

EDIT: Done. Yay for sitting here watching step files convert...

They are either "paying" it and keeping up with the other conferences, or just not doing anything at all. They are just in it hoping that it will change within the time they have the contract so they will be in a prime spot to manage the loss. If they aren't at the table, then they aren't even in the picture.

If the networks hate them and are losing money, then why would the terms remain the same (i.e. printing money for the conference at the expense of the parent network) when the current contracts expire. I understand that the conferences are making a lot of money now but do not see how it will continue for decades if they are money losing ventures.

Maybe. I know I'm not paying full boat just so I can watch BC and NCState play at noon in September. Or October. Or November. Or basketball in February. If I could subscribe to just VT, then it's 99% I would be in for that. (Dependent upon price of course. I'm not paying $50 a month for the privilege of getting some softball games and our November basketball schedule...no offense.)

Right now the "lower" conference games, the BC-NcState tilts are picked up on Raycom. If I'm sitting to watch football, I'm stopping on an $EC or B1G game, not an ACC low-def snoozer. That drives the numbers and thus the $$$.

She needs to rally the greatest house in all of Baltimore: Hamsterdam!

It's the basis on which they argue morality, and therefore it is used as a type of moral standard.

I just can't wrap my head around how you're making this connection.

I just don't agree that saying "morality is relative to culture" is equal to an actual moral standard. Just because one might believe that morals (or anything really) are influenced and shaped by culture does not make that belief an actual moral standard.

In my mind that is like saying that beliefs that "standard" toppings for pizza are different based on culture are, themselves, toppings for pizza. That makes absolutely no sense.

What you're saying essentially breaks down as follows

Argument = "standard" toppings for pizza differ by culture

You're saying their argument is a type of topping for the pizza

Argument = topping for pizza

wut?

I think the author ignores the fact that the SEC has demonstrated in the past that they do not want to add another school in SC, GA, or FL. He argues that Clemson and FSU, as well as Texas and Oklahoma, will be poached by the SEC at some point or another.

I don't entirely disagree with his points about networks - the independent television network model is fading and the ACC wouldn't serve its members well to invest in creating another media entity at the moment - and I agree with posters above that we should investigate streaming subscription services instead of a dedicated TV network. I said on another thread recently that this is all I would need - a reliable streaming service so that I can see the games I want to see when they are on, not ESPN on a cable package where I need to buy an additional package to see ESPNU, SECN, LHN, BTN, PAC12N, etc. I've left that model and I'm not looking back.

Having said all of that, I think the eventuality of it all will come down to the SEC poaching OK and OKSt as well as TCU and NCSt, Texas going independent, a shuffling of Big Ten and ACC teams (maybe including Vandy as well), and the eventual expansion of the PAC to make 16 team conferences across the board.

Yeah Fox has invested heavily in sports, both in college football (conference deals, hiring Erin A for the studio and Stewart Mandel for the web) as well as the World Cup (I think this will be a disaster). As far as in-the-booth talent, though, they are still pretty far behind everyone else. I expect this to change. I also dislike the fact that it is the only one of the big four networks that I can't get free via antenna or streaming.

Pages