Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
*** Football News Thread ***
Author Message
Foreverandever Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,784
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 205
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #381
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-16-2020 12:16 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 11:26 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 09:14 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  Lol at people just now realizing that the ESPN+ part of the TV deal is going to be a thorn in the side of the conference.

But please, let's continue to sing the praises of a commissioner that has done nothing for the league.

Lol this is such a bull**** take.

We are losing (roughly) one game each on football to ESPN+ it will usually be those FCS games, games that were shown on ESPN 3 before. We actually have more guarenteed games on linear than we did before. The only people this will really suck for is those who have CBSsports in their regular basic cable package. For those who had to pay for it they can easily switch to ESPN+ and it's probably cheaper than the add on. For those who didn't have the CBSsports option (about 40% of the country) this is actually better, since its available all over the world.

Not saying we should keep Aresco (2m a year is absurd for what he delivers), but let's be honest in our criticism.

That was my understanding before the release this week. I get that we no longer have an FCS game, and one of your games goes to the chopping block. I'm just surprised ours is ECU-UCF.

Wonder if we thought we were guaranteed X number of games over linear platforms, but we were actually taking the difference between required ESPN+ games and total games. Maybe we still have to hit that requirement with less total games.

It's either an early subscriber grab(smart but fug them), or more games will end up on ESPN+ than we think.

No, there is a minimum they have to put on linear in the contract announcements. It's more than we had in our previous contract. Same for the games on ABC, we increased all linear television slots in this contract for football. Losing the CBSsports games for basketball I believe hurt us there, but the exposure on ESPN also went up for basketball, per the contract.

I believe ESPN has actually shown more games on linear television overall and on ABC than were required every year of the AAC. We all assumed the non required games would go on ESPN+. I think it's like 14-16 games a season that weren't covered by the appearences. Which works out to one a team and a couple for others.

What we speculated about and what appears to be in some way happening is them using our better games to ESPN+ to drive subscriptions. Which would be a clever way of keeping our ratings and therefore influence and popularity down. This would also work nicely for them as a scapegoat for lowering our value in future negotiations. If we don't drive sub numbers because people reject the OTT strategy of ESPN and continue to go with skinny cable like streaming packages we get the blame too. If it is successful they got us cheap locked in for years and no need to pay attention to us.

The twelve year long part of the deal is the problem, the SEC made a similar mistake with the CBS deal length and as we near the end of it there is no doubt that the SEC revenue is vastly under what it would be had they been able to renegotiate half way through their long term contract. They at least get national exposure from it and a push as CBS' only true college football product. Why Aresco a former TV executive would set up a similar deal knowing all of this is pretty obvious when you look at his own contract. It simply is irrelevant to him. He'll close out the AAC run with what around 10-12m in the mid 2020s and like climate change this will be the future's problem. The commish after Aresco is going to be twiddling his thumbs from 2025-2032 as we watch people pass us by in revenue stuck in a contract while they sign three different ones. Similar to the BIG and SEC over the last decade.
(This post was last modified: 09-16-2020 01:29 PM by Foreverandever.)
09-16-2020 01:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Online
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 4,047
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 187
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeech
Post: #382
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-16-2020 01:24 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 12:16 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 11:26 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 09:14 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  Lol at people just now realizing that the ESPN+ part of the TV deal is going to be a thorn in the side of the conference.

But please, let's continue to sing the praises of a commissioner that has done nothing for the league.

Lol this is such a bull**** take.

We are losing (roughly) one game each on football to ESPN+ it will usually be those FCS games, games that were shown on ESPN 3 before. We actually have more guarenteed games on linear than we did before. The only people this will really suck for is those who have CBSsports in their regular basic cable package. For those who had to pay for it they can easily switch to ESPN+ and it's probably cheaper than the add on. For those who didn't have the CBSsports option (about 40% of the country) this is actually better, since its available all over the world.

Not saying we should keep Aresco (2m a year is absurd for what he delivers), but let's be honest in our criticism.

That was my understanding before the release this week. I get that we no longer have an FCS game, and one of your games goes to the chopping block. I'm just surprised ours is ECU-UCF.

Wonder if we thought we were guaranteed X number of games over linear platforms, but we were actually taking the difference between required ESPN+ games and total games. Maybe we still have to hit that requirement with less total games.

It's either an early subscriber grab(smart but fug them), or more games will end up on ESPN+ than we think.

No, there is a minimum they have to put on linear in the contract announcements. It's more than we had in our previous contract. Same for the games on ABC, we increased all linear television slots in this contract for football. Losing the CBSsports games for basketball I believe hurt us there, but the exposure on ESPN also went up for basketball, per the contract.

I believe ESPN has actually shown more games on linear television overall and on ABC than were required every year of the AAC. We all assumed the non required games would go on ESPN+. I think it's like 14-16 games a season that weren't covered by the appearences. Which works out to one a team and a couple for others.

What we speculated about and what appears to be in some way happening is them using our better games to ESPN+ to drive subscriptions. Which would be a clever way of keeping our ratings and therefore influence and popularity down. This would also work nicely for them as a scapegoat for lowering our value in future negotiations. If we don't drive sub numbers because people reject the OTT strategy of ESPN and continue to go with skinny cable like streaming packages we get the blame too. If it is successful they got us cheap locked in for years and no need to pay attention to us.

The twelve year long part of the deal is the problem, the SEC made a similar mistake with the CBS deal length and as we near the end of it there is no doubt that the SEC revenue is vastly under what it would be had they been able to renegotiate half way through their long term contract. They at least get national exposure from it and a push as CBS' only true college football product. Why Aresco a former TV executive would set up a similar deal knowing all of this is pretty obvious when you look at his own contract. It simply is irrelevant to him. He'll close out the AAC run with what around 10-12m in the mid 2020s and like climate change this will be the future's problem. The commish after Aresco is going to be twiddling his thumbs from 2025-2032 as we watch people pass us by in revenue stuck in a contract while they sign three different ones. Similar to the BIG and SEC over the last decade.

On the SEC front, and likely ours, it's got to work both ways to some extent. i.e. the SEC probably got more on the front end because of the length of the deal.

Using made up numbers here because I don't know the SEC details, but let's say you sign a 10 year deal for 50m per year. If it wasn't 10 years, it would probably be 35m per year (for let's say 5 years). On the back half, second contract, maybe they are worth 65m. It levels out in that scenario (500m total for both deals), but obviously never works quite like that. It can end up positive or negative depending on what happens with your brand.

As far as Aresco and the AAC are concerned, it was probably something similar. Maybe it's 4m/yr over a shorter term. The decision comes to whether you take the 7m over a longer term, or take 4m and make the gamble that you'll be worth over the breakeven 10m in 5 years. Given that we had differentiated ourselves, and the uncertainty around the future value of live sports/tv in general, I don't necessarily blame Aresco for taking the bigger bump for longer.
09-16-2020 01:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stxrunner Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,651
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 151
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: Chicago, IL
Post: #383
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-16-2020 12:16 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 11:26 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 09:14 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  Lol at people just now realizing that the ESPN+ part of the TV deal is going to be a thorn in the side of the conference.

But please, let's continue to sing the praises of a commissioner that has done nothing for the league.

Lol this is such a bull**** take.

We are losing (roughly) one game each on football to ESPN+ it will usually be those FCS games, games that were shown on ESPN 3 before. We actually have more guarenteed games on linear than we did before. The only people this will really suck for is those who have CBSsports in their regular basic cable package. For those who had to pay for it they can easily switch to ESPN+ and it's probably cheaper than the add on. For those who didn't have the CBSsports option (about 40% of the country) this is actually better, since its available all over the world.

Not saying we should keep Aresco (2m a year is absurd for what he delivers), but let's be honest in our criticism.

That was my understanding before the release this week. I get that we no longer have an FCS game, and one of your games goes to the chopping block. I'm just surprised ours is ECU-UCF.

Wonder if we thought we were guaranteed X number of games over linear platforms, but we were actually taking the difference between required ESPN+ games and total games. Maybe we still have to hit that requirement with less total games.

It's either an early subscriber grab(smart but fug them), or more games will end up on ESPN+ than we think.

Ding ding ding. You can think it's a BS take all you want, but they've been coy about this part of the deal the entire time. The lack of transparency while trumpeting a landmark deal where we gave away so much leverage is a big red flag. Look, I respect everyone's opinion if you want to be prideful of the deal/Aresco. And it's not like it's a disaster all things considered, but the optimism about it was a little much.

I don't know why people on here are so defensive about any part of the TV deal being criticized anyway. It's not like it's terrible, but it needs to be acknowledged that fans getting annoyed with it is going to start to become a trend.
09-16-2020 04:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stxrunner Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,651
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 151
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location: Chicago, IL
Post: #384
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-16-2020 01:24 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 12:16 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 11:26 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 09:14 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  Lol at people just now realizing that the ESPN+ part of the TV deal is going to be a thorn in the side of the conference.

But please, let's continue to sing the praises of a commissioner that has done nothing for the league.

Lol this is such a bull**** take.

We are losing (roughly) one game each on football to ESPN+ it will usually be those FCS games, games that were shown on ESPN 3 before. We actually have more guarenteed games on linear than we did before. The only people this will really suck for is those who have CBSsports in their regular basic cable package. For those who had to pay for it they can easily switch to ESPN+ and it's probably cheaper than the add on. For those who didn't have the CBSsports option (about 40% of the country) this is actually better, since its available all over the world.

Not saying we should keep Aresco (2m a year is absurd for what he delivers), but let's be honest in our criticism.

That was my understanding before the release this week. I get that we no longer have an FCS game, and one of your games goes to the chopping block. I'm just surprised ours is ECU-UCF.

Wonder if we thought we were guaranteed X number of games over linear platforms, but we were actually taking the difference between required ESPN+ games and total games. Maybe we still have to hit that requirement with less total games.

It's either an early subscriber grab(smart but fug them), or more games will end up on ESPN+ than we think.

No, there is a minimum they have to put on linear in the contract announcements. It's more than we had in our previous contract. Same for the games on ABC, we increased all linear television slots in this contract for football. Losing the CBSsports games for basketball I believe hurt us there, but the exposure on ESPN also went up for basketball, per the contract.

I believe ESPN has actually shown more games on linear television overall and on ABC than were required every year of the AAC. We all assumed the non required games would go on ESPN+. I think it's like 14-16 games a season that weren't covered by the appearences. Which works out to one a team and a couple for others.

What we speculated about and what appears to be in some way happening is them using our better games to ESPN+ to drive subscriptions. Which would be a clever way of keeping our ratings and therefore influence and popularity down. This would also work nicely for them as a scapegoat for lowering our value in future negotiations. If we don't drive sub numbers because people reject the OTT strategy of ESPN and continue to go with skinny cable like streaming packages we get the blame too. If it is successful they got us cheap locked in for years and no need to pay attention to us.

The twelve year long part of the deal is the problem, the SEC made a similar mistake with the CBS deal length and as we near the end of it there is no doubt that the SEC revenue is vastly under what it would be had they been able to renegotiate half way through their long term contract. They at least get national exposure from it and a push as CBS' only true college football product. Why Aresco a former TV executive would set up a similar deal knowing all of this is pretty obvious when you look at his own contract. It simply is irrelevant to him. He'll close out the AAC run with what around 10-12m in the mid 2020s and like climate change this will be the future's problem. The commish after Aresco is going to be twiddling his thumbs from 2025-2032 as we watch people pass us by in revenue stuck in a contract while they sign three different ones. Similar to the BIG and SEC over the last decade.

Wait, so if you agree that the deal has some pretty major flaws, why the hostility?

Maybe my original statement was a bit much, but this deal will be an annoyance to the conference IMO, and we are in it for a long time.
09-16-2020 04:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoOwls111 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,305
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Owls
Location: NYC
Post: #385
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
The only major issue with the deal is the length, IMO the AAC could have gotten the same deal ($$$) for an 8 year length.

Every other conference will eventually have games on ESPN+ if they have a deal with ESPN, the Big XII signed a deal last yer to have some of their game on ESPN+.
09-16-2020 05:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I_LUV_MEMPHISTIGERS Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,773
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 187
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Memphis
Post: #386
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
I hope they realize AAC is licking our chops.
09-16-2020 08:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,784
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 205
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #387
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-16-2020 04:22 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 12:16 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 11:26 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 09:14 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  Lol at people just now realizing that the ESPN+ part of the TV deal is going to be a thorn in the side of the conference.

But please, let's continue to sing the praises of a commissioner that has done nothing for the league.

Lol this is such a bull**** take.

We are losing (roughly) one game each on football to ESPN+ it will usually be those FCS games, games that were shown on ESPN 3 before. We actually have more guarenteed games on linear than we did before. The only people this will really suck for is those who have CBSsports in their regular basic cable package. For those who had to pay for it they can easily switch to ESPN+ and it's probably cheaper than the add on. For those who didn't have the CBSsports option (about 40% of the country) this is actually better, since its available all over the world.

Not saying we should keep Aresco (2m a year is absurd for what he delivers), but let's be honest in our criticism.

That was my understanding before the release this week. I get that we no longer have an FCS game, and one of your games goes to the chopping block. I'm just surprised ours is ECU-UCF.

Wonder if we thought we were guaranteed X number of games over linear platforms, but we were actually taking the difference between required ESPN+ games and total games. Maybe we still have to hit that requirement with less total games.

It's either an early subscriber grab(smart but fug them), or more games will end up on ESPN+ than we think.

Ding ding ding. You can think it's a BS take all you want, but they've been coy about this part of the deal the entire time. The lack of transparency while trumpeting a landmark deal where we gave away so much leverage is a big red flag. Look, I respect everyone's opinion if you want to be prideful of the deal/Aresco. And it's not like it's a disaster all things considered, but the optimism about it was a little much.

I don't know why people on here are so defensive about any part of the TV deal being criticized anyway. It's not like it's terrible, but it needs to be acknowledged that fans getting annoyed with it is going to start to become a trend.

There hasn't been any coyness. They came out and told us the minimum number of games that must be shown on linear tv. Period. It is more games than the previous contract and I believe attackcoog even ran the numbers and it is more guarenteed games on ESPN/2/ABC than we have ever had shown.

No one is being defensive but you. because you're simply wrong. The release on the deal included the number of guarenteed football, men and women's basketball appearences on the ESPN linear television. So again a handful of games will go on ESPN+ many assumed those would be FCS games. Some speculated we left ourselves open to have our best content put on ESPN+ where it will get little to no attention, that appears to be at least some what true.

Someone mentioned that SMU didn't get picked to be a CBS game, apparently forgetting that CBS is only allowed to pick up Navy games as ESPN has our exclusive rights minus Navy and like 5 basketball games a year.
09-16-2020 10:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoOwls111 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,305
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Owls
Location: NYC
Post: #388
RE: *** Football News Thread ***


Maybe the PAC will play football in 2020 after all.
09-16-2020 11:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Online
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 4,047
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 187
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeech
Post: #389
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-16-2020 10:55 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 04:22 PM)stxrunner Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 12:16 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 11:26 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(09-16-2020 09:14 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  Lol at people just now realizing that the ESPN+ part of the TV deal is going to be a thorn in the side of the conference.

But please, let's continue to sing the praises of a commissioner that has done nothing for the league.

Lol this is such a bull**** take.

We are losing (roughly) one game each on football to ESPN+ it will usually be those FCS games, games that were shown on ESPN 3 before. We actually have more guarenteed games on linear than we did before. The only people this will really suck for is those who have CBSsports in their regular basic cable package. For those who had to pay for it they can easily switch to ESPN+ and it's probably cheaper than the add on. For those who didn't have the CBSsports option (about 40% of the country) this is actually better, since its available all over the world.

Not saying we should keep Aresco (2m a year is absurd for what he delivers), but let's be honest in our criticism.

That was my understanding before the release this week. I get that we no longer have an FCS game, and one of your games goes to the chopping block. I'm just surprised ours is ECU-UCF.

Wonder if we thought we were guaranteed X number of games over linear platforms, but we were actually taking the difference between required ESPN+ games and total games. Maybe we still have to hit that requirement with less total games.

It's either an early subscriber grab(smart but fug them), or more games will end up on ESPN+ than we think.

Ding ding ding. You can think it's a BS take all you want, but they've been coy about this part of the deal the entire time. The lack of transparency while trumpeting a landmark deal where we gave away so much leverage is a big red flag. Look, I respect everyone's opinion if you want to be prideful of the deal/Aresco. And it's not like it's a disaster all things considered, but the optimism about it was a little much.

I don't know why people on here are so defensive about any part of the TV deal being criticized anyway. It's not like it's terrible, but it needs to be acknowledged that fans getting annoyed with it is going to start to become a trend.

There hasn't been any coyness. They came out and told us the minimum number of games that must be shown on linear tv. Period. It is more games than the previous contract and I believe attackcoog even ran the numbers and it is more guarenteed games on ESPN/2/ABC than we have ever had shown.

No one is being defensive but you. because you're simply wrong. The release on the deal included the number of guarenteed football, men and women's basketball appearences on the ESPN linear television. So again a handful of games will go on ESPN+ many assumed those would be FCS games. Some speculated we left ourselves open to have our best content put on ESPN+ where it will get little to no attention, that appears to be at least some what true.

Someone mentioned that SMU didn't get picked to be a CBS game, apparently forgetting that CBS is only allowed to pick up Navy games as ESPN has our exclusive rights minus Navy and like 5 basketball games a year.

Yeah it's a weird year. I have no doubt that our Norfolk State game would have been on + if it were actually played. I think ESPN is just taking advantage of a bad situation to try to up the early subscriber count.

This fish, unfortunately, got hooked. I'll be signing up for + next week, and will keep adding in during months that we have a game on it.
09-17-2020 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 23,383
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 759
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #390
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
American Football
@American_FB
·
3m
Time/TV update for Saturday, 10/3:

@ECUPiratesFB
at Georgia State - Noon ET on ESPNU

@MemphisFB
at
@SMU_Football
- 3:30 ET on ESPN2

@USFFootball
at
@GoBearcatsFB
- 3:30 pm ET on ESPN+

@TulsaFootball
at
@UCF_Football
- 7:30 ET on ESPN2



And one more schedule change:

@ECUPiratesFB
at
@GoBearcatsFB
moves to Friday, Nov. 13 - 7:30 pm ET on ESPN2

(had been scheduled for Saturday, 11/14)
09-21-2020 10:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hurricane Drummer Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,337
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 204
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #391
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-21-2020 10:56 AM)Pony94 Wrote:  American Football
@American_FB
·
3m
Time/TV update for Saturday, 10/3:

@ECUPiratesFB
at Georgia State - Noon ET on ESPNU

@MemphisFB
at
@SMU_Football
- 3:30 ET on ESPN2

@USFFootball
at
@GoBearcatsFB
- 3:30 pm ET on ESPN+

@TulsaFootball
at
@UCF_Football
- 7:30 ET on ESPN2



And one more schedule change:

@ECUPiratesFB
at
@GoBearcatsFB
moves to Friday, Nov. 13 - 7:30 pm ET on ESPN2

(had been scheduled for Saturday, 11/14)

Tulsa - UCF primetime in the Jupiter Jump should be a good one.
09-21-2020 11:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BraveKnight Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 86
I Root For: UCF
Location: Orlando
Post: #392
RE: *** Football News Thread ***

Looks like Divaad Wilson got his waiver. Former starting CB at Georgia.
09-21-2020 07:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crowley's Ridge Tiger Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 346
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 35
I Root For: MEMPHIS TIGERS
Location: Enemy Territory
Post: #393
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-21-2020 11:39 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  
(09-21-2020 10:56 AM)Pony94 Wrote:  American Football
@American_FB
·
3m
Time/TV update for Saturday, 10/3:

@ECUPiratesFB
at Georgia State - Noon ET on ESPNU

@MemphisFB
at
@SMU_Football
- 3:30 ET on ESPN2

@USFFootball
at
@GoBearcatsFB
- 3:30 pm ET on ESPN+

@TulsaFootball
at
@UCF_Football
- 7:30 ET on ESPN2



And one more schedule change:

@ECUPiratesFB
at
@GoBearcatsFB
moves to Friday, Nov. 13 - 7:30 pm ET on ESPN2

(had been scheduled for Saturday, 11/14)

Tulsa - UCF primetime in the Jupiter Jump should be a good one.

Bust up in there like you own it.
[Image: giphy.gif]
09-21-2020 08:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hurricane Drummer Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,337
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 204
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #394
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
(09-21-2020 08:44 PM)Crowleys Ridge Tiger Wrote:  
(09-21-2020 11:39 AM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  
(09-21-2020 10:56 AM)Pony94 Wrote:  American Football
@American_FB
·
3m
Time/TV update for Saturday, 10/3:

@ECUPiratesFB
at Georgia State - Noon ET on ESPNU

@MemphisFB
at
@SMU_Football
- 3:30 ET on ESPN2

@USFFootball
at
@GoBearcatsFB
- 3:30 pm ET on ESPN+

@TulsaFootball
at
@UCF_Football
- 7:30 ET on ESPN2



And one more schedule change:

@ECUPiratesFB
at
@GoBearcatsFB
moves to Friday, Nov. 13 - 7:30 pm ET on ESPN2

(had been scheduled for Saturday, 11/14)

Tulsa - UCF primetime in the Jupiter Jump should be a good one.

Bust up in there like you own it.
[Image: giphy.gif]

Dillon Gabriel go WEEEEEEEEEE!
09-21-2020 10:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
usffan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,146
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #395
RE: *** Football News Thread ***


From a contact tracing standpoint, I wonder if this impacts USF at all...

(insert joke about USF not actually contacting many Notre Dame players on Saturday here)

USFFan
09-22-2020 11:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CoastalJuan Online
Business Drunk
*

Posts: 4,047
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 187
I Root For: ECU
Location: Right near da beeech
Post: #396
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
NC to allow venue over 10,000 to have 7% attendance in October. i.e. ~3,600 fans for Navy-ECU. Subject to change as data comes in. No idea ow they landed on 7%.

Not to get too political while sticking to sports, I think our governor is feeling the heat in the polls. With this issue also relating to all the UNC-system football teams, Panthers, etc, it's in his best interest to keep moving toward higher football attendance.
09-22-2020 01:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 23,383
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 759
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #397
RE: *** Football News Thread ***
This doesn't mention we have had numerous players out due to contact tracing but still good.

@BillyEmbody
·
3h
Source: #SMU had zero positive COVID-19 tests from Sunday's round of testing following its win over North Texas.

Over 1,500 tests in the last four weeks or so with zero positives.
09-22-2020 02:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
usffan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,146
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 504
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #398
RE: *** Football News Thread ***


USFFan
Yesterday 10:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.