WrigleyField 22

Its not too late to enter the Luck sweepstakes!

I hate the Packers, but the idea that they are lucky is silly. How many starters were injured for them last year? They were so lucky to have all those injuries.

Who would it be? Kansas Kansas St Iowa St Baylor Louisville Cincinatti UConn USF Rutgers TCU WVU I'd call it a slightly better Conference-USA.

Very interesting article. There is quite a bit of guesswork and I think it fails to emphasize the importance of access to markets even if a particular school isn't great, but interesting either way. http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/the-geography-of-college-football-fans-and-realignment-chaos/?hp

I hope that means squatting as in lifting weights...?

Does the fact that the MWC has its own T.V. network already keep it relevant in trying to attract schools left out and gaining AQ status (rather than their current top teams just bolting for a new conference).

Baylor, Iowa State, and Kansas State jump out right away as teams that could end up screwed. I have to wonder if a scenario happens with only 12 and 14 team leagues, leaving enough for some Big 12 and MWC teams to band-aid together an AQ conference, with the Big East no longer sponsoring football.

Was Googling news about all of this and learned something. Nothing has really changed in the past 20 years: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_1pPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=GwMEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6783,2458508&dq=big+ten+expansion&hl=en

One thing that could help Urlacher in a HOF bid is how much he changed the idea on what a MLB was. Yes there were certainly athletic MLB before, but he brought it to a whole new level.

He's pretty cool. I like that the cheering during the anthem has caught on when he sings for other Chicago sports teams besides the Blackhawks. The fact that people from other cities don't like it and think its disrespectful only makes me like it more. I'm not sure how cheering with excitement while your national anthem is sung could be considered disrespectful but whatever. Cheering for the national anthem is great, as long as its not being sung for a solemn event. Like cheering for it yesterday at ground zero or at the pentagon, would be weird. At a sporting event, even marking the 10 year anniversary of 9/11- totally cool. My problem was with the USA! chant afterwards. Unless its at an Olympic sporting event, its lame and tacky.

Ha. "Coach, if Soldier Field works out do you still need a new stadium?" "Yes" Oopps.

I don't mind the frat boyish atmosphere because I feel the workers do a good job of controlling and kicking out the people that really disturb the game.

And as a smaller market, its possible the Daily Herald is just doomed. So the solution is to become more like the free content providers from an expense side. Would yield a better result than trying to compete on a subscription-pay level.

I'll chip in with an idea or two, even though I wasn't prompted. Advertisers want customers who opt in and are loyal to the product (paper) or to the advertisements. Not sure if Daily Herald has a Sunday Select product, but offer Sunday Select product. Quick lesson for others: Sunday Select is a free subscription to just receive advertising inserts. The advertisers take on the second largest cost, paper, and will pay a rate competitive (in some cases better) than normal newspaper advertising. Its a growing trend in newspapers as they have the existing infrastructure to deliver the content that advertisers don't. You could even possibly tie access to online content with this although you have to be careful the motivation is for the ads and not the online content. Also you can't marginalize paying customers. Even just making a free subscription to view certain content online would be a positive to retailers because someone seeking out a site specifically is a better bet for marketers than someone who followed the link from NSBB and has no loyalty to that publication. This would take some innovation and investment with the different tech aspects, but could yield a stronger value to advertisers. And the simplest fix is to just let paper subscribers get online access for free. If I was paying for the Daily Herald and they told me I couldn't get it online as well without further charges, I'd drop them. Whatever cost it takes to run the website is not worth the circulation losses they'll suffer from people who would have the same mindset as me. Also having certain pay/free content. Maybe some people will pay a smaller fee for special articles, but not for Bruce's daily write ups and blogs. But if you get them hooked on Bruces blogs on a daily basis and then periodically offer pay-only content that is more in depth someone may take the plunge. Just some ideas. I don't work on the newspaper side, but just looking at it from what advertisers look for and how to leverage your products to maximize that since that is a bulk of the revenue.

Well its a rapidly changing atmosphere where some stuff is relatively new would be one reason. I'll have to think about it, but I'll try to later. But my premise is just based on what I see advertisers spend every month, and I get a little bit of reason for why spending changes when it does and its all about what the media outlets provide. And serious revenue is there, both potential (if given the right access) and in actual dollars.

From the reader perspective, its not really emotional either. What does your written content provide me. How much is it worth to me? You have every right to collect money for content you produce, but if you want it from me, I might pull away. No harm, your business and my dollar don't match up. Thats just business, not emotion.

Online companies that successfully pull in revenue from advertisers provide added value than something like a simple banner ad and what you see on forums like NSBB. Thats my whole point. These banners provide low yield of eventual customers. Advertisers want customers that seek the content and are loyal, both from a content perspective and from an advertising perspective. If all you are willing to provide advertisers is simple traffic and hits your advertising revenue will reflect that. And at some point, yes newspapers as we know it will die. Well not die completely, but change is big. First what you'll just see is consolidation. Smaller markets and even sub-markets will see content discontinued, and a big trend has been to discontinue service on certain days. But smart papers adapt. Even among people who get their news media from other sources, people still prefer their Sunday inserts as advertising. And every Sunday, newspapers reach more unique users than Super Bowl Sunday. There's still plenty of potential for revenue for papers who provide that value. Not as much as there once was, but its there.

Again the comparison to places that don't pay for the content produced. You're not using your head because your emotionally tied to the fact that you were the one producing the material (I think). It doesn't matter. All that matters is the value your provide to advertisers. If you provide them with value, they provide you with money. Simple as that.

Any context on what QBs might be on the waiver wire. If I'm him I consider biting the bullet with McCoy and a waiver QB and that offer isn't enough. You can try though. Its not a bad proposal on your end, I just don't see it being accepted.

30 team league? Its a 16 team league with an extra RB, WR, TE, and one OP (along with the standard spots). It was auction draft and I had something come up that I couldn't make it. Needless to say autopick was not friendly and only drafted one QB for me: David Garrard, haha. The damn computer probably spent half or more of my budget on WR. Luckily its just a random league with nothing at stake, no money or anything. Edit- In case anyone wants to see the horrors of autopick auction

And yet, they have to be banking on that occuring, otherwise they wouldn't be trying it. Check out this article about Newsday in NY's trouble in getting subscribers to their pay site: http://www.observer.com/2010/media/after-three-months-only-35-subscriptions-newsdays-web-site Although in their paywall, they let the print subscribers get access for free while DH is charging them. I'm guessing a lot of their subscribers will be print subscribers. "banking on" doesn't sound like such a great business decision. They're probably wrong. The "double" subscription is also a joke.

And the person charging the fees shouldn't be surprised if they receive less from subscriptions than they do from the advertising hits.

Chiming in from someone working with the industry (although a lot of this may be obvious). An overwhelming amount of revenue for the newspaper industry comes from the advertisers. The amount advertisers are willing to pay is highly tied to the number of readers and circulation. Having subscriptions will most likely decrease readership. Thus advertisers will not be willing to spend as much. Now advertisers will pay a premium to advertise to readers that they know want the ads. So the best solution, in general is to make readers subscribe for free, collect info on them, and have them opt in to certain advertising. I guess every business is unique, but I highly doubt the increase in subscription fees will outweigh the decrease in advertising revenue.

Collins @Hou Grossman vs NYG McCown vs Ten Brandon Lloyd vs Oak Manningham @ Wash

Agreed. Make it a 2QB League, two extra flex spots, and one extra bench.