Also, lots of rumors going around about the LHN spiraling the drain. Any insight sips? That would be quite the dagger since y'all signed your grant of rights to the conference in order to get the LHN, and then they want to can it 3 years in?
http://espn.go.com/blog/big12/post/_/id/86489/espn-projects-big-12-win-loss-records
Eek, ESPN doesn't think highly of ol' Charlie's chances this season.
Eek, ESPN doesn't think highly of ol' Charlie's chances this season.
Originally posted by RayRay99
It just demonstrates that they get overhyped because of the name and not because of their performance.
Actually, it doesn't. That was the point of my post. But I guess aggie didn't educate you well enough to understand something so simple.
It just demonstrates that they get overhyped because of the name and not because of their performance.
Actually, it doesn't. That was the point of my post. But I guess aggie didn't educate you well enough to understand something so simple.
DarkRogue
offline
offline
Gotta agree with LHF here, the metric proves nothing and is baised towards teams that start with a lower ranking.
He also needs a jump to conclusions mat to decide that those numbers mean that UT is overranked because of the name. Pre-season rankings are generally a joke based upon the previous year's final rankings and taking into account recruiting rankings and graduating players. Being ranked high at the beginning of a season is more likely to be correlated to the previous season than it is a team's name. Although prestige factor of the school may play into the rankings to some extent, to attribute any difference in rankings entirely to a team's name is idiotic. But you really can't expect much from an aggie.
Originally posted by DarkRogue
the metric proves nothing and is baised towards teams that start with a lower ranking.
The metric is pretty silly, granted, but it is something to talk about anyway. However, teams like Alabama are consistently ranked high to start the season and fared well in the metric. While pre-season polls are lol, and like LHF said are mostly an indicator as to where the team ended the previous season, texas only fared better than their pre-season ranking 3 out of the past 15 seasons. I take it to mean that either 1) they are overhyped based on name recognition, or 2) they constantly underachieve as the metric suggests.
the metric proves nothing and is baised towards teams that start with a lower ranking.
The metric is pretty silly, granted, but it is something to talk about anyway. However, teams like Alabama are consistently ranked high to start the season and fared well in the metric. While pre-season polls are lol, and like LHF said are mostly an indicator as to where the team ended the previous season, texas only fared better than their pre-season ranking 3 out of the past 15 seasons. I take it to mean that either 1) they are overhyped based on name recognition, or 2) they constantly underachieve as the metric suggests.
Originally posted by Redass Ranch
or maybe they shouldn't do any rankings until four games have been played
That would be the intelligent thing to do, but they have to screw up positioning and the ability for teams to overcome a lower initial ranking by acting like they know about every team in the country and ranking them based on the knowledge they do have. Thus, you get the guys ranking them saying, "Hmmm, I haven't put texas in there yet, I better put them somewhere so people don't realize I know nothing about them."
or maybe they shouldn't do any rankings until four games have been played
That would be the intelligent thing to do, but they have to screw up positioning and the ability for teams to overcome a lower initial ranking by acting like they know about every team in the country and ranking them based on the knowledge they do have. Thus, you get the guys ranking them saying, "Hmmm, I haven't put texas in there yet, I better put them somewhere so people don't realize I know nothing about them."
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bs1c-VbCAAEyTe3.jpg
http://blog.chron.com/sportsupdate/2014/07/comcast-picks-up-sec-network/#25038101=0
Originally posted by
There was no mention in the ESPN announcement today regarding Longhorn Network, the company’s University of Texas channel.
http://blog.chron.com/sportsupdate/2014/07/comcast-picks-up-sec-network/#25038101=0
Originally posted by
There was no mention in the ESPN announcement today regarding Longhorn Network, the company’s University of Texas channel.
Originally posted by Night Dragon
Let's not get crazy here. P12 was making similar boasts about its network(s) and they got a does of reality. The reason why the B1G network worked so well is they have alums that moved south and it helped drive the network's availability. How many SEC fans are actual alums and even more so, how many leave the SEC country. If California isn't clamoring for the SEC, then that would be a problem. Furthermore, the source of this information is slightly biased.
Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
the SEC network is facing the same problems getting carriers that the LHN and virtually every other sports network faced.
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/every-sec-school-will-make-more-tv-money-than-texas-notre-dame-072314
Originally posted by Clay Travis
The SEC Network is now the most successful new sports cable launch and it's still a month away from the launch
Originally posted by
Clay Travis þ@ClayTravisBGID 1m
Every SEC school will make more money off @secnetwork than Texas makes off the Longhorn Network.
Originally posted by
Clay Travis þ@ClayTravisBGID 56s
Which means Texas A&M will make more money off the Longhorn Network's creation than Texas will. Ouch.
http://us105fm.com/files/2013/12/ny4.gif
Let's not get crazy here. P12 was making similar boasts about its network(s) and they got a does of reality. The reason why the B1G network worked so well is they have alums that moved south and it helped drive the network's availability. How many SEC fans are actual alums and even more so, how many leave the SEC country. If California isn't clamoring for the SEC, then that would be a problem. Furthermore, the source of this information is slightly biased.
Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
the SEC network is facing the same problems getting carriers that the LHN and virtually every other sports network faced.
http://www.foxsports.com/college-football/outkick-the-coverage/every-sec-school-will-make-more-tv-money-than-texas-notre-dame-072314
Originally posted by Clay Travis
The SEC Network is now the most successful new sports cable launch and it's still a month away from the launch
Originally posted by
Clay Travis þ@ClayTravisBGID 1m
Every SEC school will make more money off @secnetwork than Texas makes off the Longhorn Network.
Originally posted by
Clay Travis þ@ClayTravisBGID 56s
Which means Texas A&M will make more money off the Longhorn Network's creation than Texas will. Ouch.
http://us105fm.com/files/2013/12/ny4.gif
#1 Team in all of CFB the Oklahoma Sooners will continue to carry the Big 12 as well as bitchslap scrub teams like Alabama
Originally posted by cubsluver22
#1 Team in all of CFB the Oklahoma Sooners will continue to carry the Big 12 as well as bitchslap scrub teams like Alabama
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=330040201
http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CompositeTeamRankings
Scoreboard
#1 Team in all of CFB the Oklahoma Sooners will continue to carry the Big 12 as well as bitchslap scrub teams like Alabama
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=330040201
http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CompositeTeamRankings
Scoreboard
Spread-em offense
offline
offline
Originally posted by RayRay99
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=330040201
http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CompositeTeamRankings
Scoreboard
Oklahoma 39th. sounds about right
http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/boxscore?gameId=330040201
http://247sports.com/Season/2015-Football/CompositeTeamRankings
Scoreboard
Oklahoma 39th. sounds about right
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Closing-Bell/2014/07/24/TWC.aspx
Originally posted by
Time Warner Cable, the country's second biggest cable operator, has agreed to carry SEC Network as of its Aug. 14 launch. Bright House Networks also will carry the channel, bringing its distribution footprint up to 60 million homes. The deals leave DirecTV, Charter and Verizon as the only big SEC-area distributors that have not cut a deal. DirecTV and Charter sources say they expect to carry the channel before its first regular-season SEC football game, Aug. 28.
Distributors are paying $1.40 per subscriber per month for the channel within the SEC's 11-state footprint and $0.25 per month outside of it. The channel will be on expanded basic tiers within SEC territory and digital basic outside of it. Just last week, the country's biggest distributor, Comcast, signed a deal to carry the channel, joining a roster that includes AT&T, Cox and Dish Network.
I thought these things took time sips...
Originally posted by
Time Warner Cable, the country's second biggest cable operator, has agreed to carry SEC Network as of its Aug. 14 launch. Bright House Networks also will carry the channel, bringing its distribution footprint up to 60 million homes. The deals leave DirecTV, Charter and Verizon as the only big SEC-area distributors that have not cut a deal. DirecTV and Charter sources say they expect to carry the channel before its first regular-season SEC football game, Aug. 28.
Distributors are paying $1.40 per subscriber per month for the channel within the SEC's 11-state footprint and $0.25 per month outside of it. The channel will be on expanded basic tiers within SEC territory and digital basic outside of it. Just last week, the country's biggest distributor, Comcast, signed a deal to carry the channel, joining a roster that includes AT&T, Cox and Dish Network.
I thought these things took time sips...
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
