And your point for posting this garbage is? Oh wait I know because you are an embarrassment to the university that gave you an education. Good job Derrek. If anyone was going to dig this one up to post here it was you.
That is one of the best written pieces I've seen on all of this.
(02-23-2012 04:15 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]That is one of the best written pieces I've seen on all of this.
So how do you explain the Green Bay Packers? You ever been to Green Bay?
The Packers have some the most loyal fans in all of sports, in the good times and bad; and that is really hard for me to say as a Chicago Bears fan. And the Milwaukee Bucks and Milwaukee Brewers, etc.
And if markets meant all of that, then how do you explain the San Diego Padres; or why San Diego couldn't keep a pro basketball team? How did Houston lose the Oilers?
The Big East will fade into irrelevance anyway. Either way ECU would be stuck with CUSA schools. It's not like you're truly moving up a peg.
(02-23-2012 04:24 PM)PirateMarv Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2012 04:15 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]That is one of the best written pieces I've seen on all of this.
How did Houston lose the Oilers?
Stadium issue..Bud Adams said build me a new staduim or I'm gone. Everyone thought he was bluffing. So the Oilers left, and we built Reliant, hence the Texans were an expansion team.
Pro sports are a whole nother animal compared to colleges.
This thread I am certain is destined for good things.
(02-23-2012 04:30 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]Pro sports are a whole nother animal compared to colleges.
Yes it is, but it is that that argument that is being made by the article and by the Big East. That argument seems to run directly opposite of the SEC, ACC and Big Ten. Guess which collegiate conferences are more successful? Go ahead.
ECU needed to win around the level of Boise State to overcome "the small market problem" or have a basketball program that could add value like Memphis or Temple.
If you want to talk about small market schools, give me Southern Miss. Better football and solid basketball when compared to ECU. The sad thing is that if the Big East needed another school, I would first look west for Air Force and in the east with UMass.
(02-23-2012 04:09 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote: [ -> ]Small Market Problems
In lieu of pulling out a quote for convenience, I will simply post the link and...
Everyone nows all of ECU's positives and negatives...and no doubt their local market (or lack of one), especially compared to others, was a major factor...just like ECU's own Chancellor noted some 14 months ago when he too said 90% of the reason why the Big East will expand will be for new TV markets.
The writer and even ECU's Chancellor get it.
Doesn't mean ECU can't be successful in the future...in whatever alliance/merged conf they end up in.
(02-23-2012 04:40 PM)PirateMarv Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2012 04:30 PM)stever20 Wrote: [ -> ]Pro sports are a whole nother animal compared to colleges.
Yes it is, but it is that that argument that is being made by the article and by the Big East. That argument seems to run directly opposite of the SEC, ACC and Big Ten. Guess which collegiate conferences are more successful? Go ahead.
And all the other conferences have been around a lot longer than the Big East:
Big Ten: Started in 1896
SEC: Started in 1933
ACC: Started in 1953
Pac-12: Started in 1959
Big 12: (most were in the SWC which started in 1914 and others came from the Big 8, which started in 1907).
Big East: Only football member that was in the conf in 2003 that will be in the conf in 2013 will be RUTGERS...so when you have just ONE football team that has been in your conf for more than 8-9 years...and you have to invite 7 or 8 new ones...TV Markets do play a major role in those decisions...much more so than say the late 1800's or early 1900's, when TV markets didn't even exist.
Dont wory about it Bonds...everyone knows 4ever is a ACC fan (probably the Holes) and this kid that wrote the article is a Duke fan. I think it just speaks to their character. Its like the kid last night at the bar with a UNC hat on while a room full of Pirate fans watch our basketball team play. He just wanted someone to say something to him. No one did, and in fact he was all by himself in the corner. I mentioned to the bartender that if he really wants to be cool and well liked, he would at least take the hat off. She said he was a jerk and hung out all the time in there to try and get a rise out of Pirate fans.
At least now, the people on this forum see what we have to put up with....jerks trying to get attention.
Our situation truly sucks. But let's stop acting like the Big East is truly greener pastures for us. They're supposed to be head and shoulders above us but they're fighting for the same teams that we are close with. They're full of markets but have almost zero market penetration with the exceptions of Memphis and Temple. UConn, UL, and Rutgers might not even be there in the future.
Market location is the monster that Louisiana Tech, Southern Miss, Marshall, Tulsa, and East Carolina all have to over come. It is truely yellow-lining at its worst.
As for the explain Green Bay success in the NFL comment on page one of the thread... The Packers are the third oldest team in the NFL, formed in 1919. Their rise and dominance pre-dated media and television controlling sports with money. If they were trying to get a team today, they wouldn't even get looked at by the league.
As for the controversy this article is stirring, I don't think it paints ECU in bad light at all. ECU has good football and an amazingly rabid football following and nothing someone writes listing the qualities of other expansion entrants is going to diminish that... so don't worry about it!
(02-23-2012 04:15 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ]And your point for posting this garbage is? Oh wait I know because you are an embarrassment to the university that gave you an education. Good job Derrek. If anyone was going to dig this one up to post here it was you.
Can you quit being a dick for one day. It is a valid topic. And you are an embarrassment period. A big baby that hates facts because he thinks his school is bigger than it actually is.
(02-23-2012 04:09 PM)ecuacc4ever Wrote: [ -> ]Small Market Problems
In lieu of pulling out a quote for convenience, I will simply post the link and...
While I do not have "too many" problems with the article (although there is a mistake located therein that I will not elaborate on), I too have to ask why you wanted to post it? DC, you've not made many friends over the past few years... why do you try to alienate yourself from the fans? Do you like being the outcast? Do you enjoy being a jerk?
What happened with you and the Wake County Pirate Club? Tell us...
(02-23-2012 05:26 PM)IceJus10 Wrote: [ -> ]As for the explain Green Bay success in the NFL comment on page one of the thread... The Packers are the third oldest team in the NFL, formed in 1919. Their rise and dominance pre-dated media and television controlling sports with money. If they were trying to get a team today, they wouldn't even get looked at by the league.
As for the controversy this article is stirring, I don't think it paints ECU in bad light at all. ECU has good football and an amazingly rabid football following and nothing someone writes listing the qualities of other expansion entrants is going to diminish that... so don't worry about it!
I've stated this elsewhere: the Packers are NOT a small-market team. Their market is truly and legitimately the entire state of Wisconsin, which is a good-sized market. Milwaukee (not a small market) is also treated by the NFL as an official Packers primary home TV market by the league in addition to Green Bay, meaning that it is subject to blackout restrictions and other rules (not that they would ever apply to a team that sells out every week). Other markets might show certain teams all of the time due to geographic proximity, such as Austin normally showing Cowboys games (these are called secondary markets), but the Packers are the only case where it has multiple primary TV markets that are set in stone by league rules. Put just Green Bay and Milwaukee together and you do NOT have a small market at all. Now, the Jacksonville Jaguars are an example of a legit small-market NFL team. The Packers are the equivalent of Ohio State in the state of Ohio, while the Jaguars would be the equivalent of Akron. There's a big-time difference.
(02-23-2012 05:33 PM)War Torn Ruston Wrote: [ -> ] (02-23-2012 04:15 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ]And your point for posting this garbage is? Oh wait I know because you are an embarrassment to the university that gave you an education. Good job Derrek. If anyone was going to dig this one up to post here it was you.
Can you quit being a dick for one day. It is a valid topic. And you are an embarrassment period. A big baby that hates facts because he thinks his school is bigger than it actually is.
WTR- you don't know this guy well or the things he has done in the past... leave it alone.