Army-Navy is a rare gem these days. History and tradition above money and commercialism. Navy should keep their whole share if they join, and I'd hope ECU would refuse any part of it if were on the table.

(03-11-2013 06:17 PM)Bull Wrote:  IF Navy is willing to be a full and equal conference mate for everything but the Army Navy game, that's actually a good deal for the A12. They have a legitimate national following...

Yet they don't have a single poster on this board.

Other than the Army-Navy game, is Navy really appointment viewing? Not flaming because none of us are. Just curious.

(03-11-2013 06:21 PM)mattsarz Wrote:  If you can get a MWC-Hawai'i like deal out of Navy, then do it and let them keep Army-Navy & ND-Navy revenue.

I'm referring to the item making the rounds that Hawai'i will not make any money off the MWC TV contract as a football only member (much like Navy) and will instead get to keep their statewide PPV package alive and make $2.3 million in TV rights per year from that package as long as their are six games in the package from conference & non-conference games. UH will still provide games to the national TV packages, but make no money or bonus payments from national TV.

Even if the money overall stays the same, sharing over 11 instead of 12 means some extra $$$ for everyone.

Matt, doesn't those two games essentially fund the Navy sports program?

I can't see Navy giving up the revenues from those games.

Seriously, why should Navy share its money? If this conference fails before ever starting it will be because these new members want money they have not earned. Every other conference pays a decreased percentage to new members. Maybe the NNNNBE should do the same to drill in to some of your heads this isn't a charity.

(03-12-2013 07:33 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  Seriously, why should Navy share its money? If this conference fails before ever starting it will be because these new members want money they have not earned. Every other conference pays a decreased percentage to new members. Maybe the NNNNBE should do the same to drill in to some of your heads this isn't a charity.

And then the new schools could always take their ball and go somewhere else. No one is happy with how this has gone down, and both sides need to make a compromise. Hopefully we end up with a deal that neither side is completely happy with, as that would likely mean it was a fair deal.

(03-11-2013 07:59 PM)ECUPirated Wrote:  Do you allow Navy to have a "special deal" regardless of the history of the Army/Navy game.

Yep. We need Navy and I look forward to having them in the EAC/NAC/A12!

(03-12-2013 07:01 AM)TerryD Wrote:  Matt, doesn't those two games essentially fund the Navy sports program?

I can't see Navy giving up the revenues from those games.

Probably is a big chunk.

I don't remember everything about the Boise-Big East discussions, but did Boise St. want to control their home game rights and make money from the Big East TV deal for their conference road games? If they did, that would be way different than what I'm suggesting with Navy and what is happening with Hawai'i in the MWC.

(03-12-2013 07:40 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(03-12-2013 07:33 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  Seriously, why should Navy share its money? If this conference fails before ever starting it will be because these new members want money they have not earned. Every other conference pays a decreased percentage to new members. Maybe the NNNNBE should do the same to drill in to some of your heads this isn't a charity.

And then the new schools could always take their ball and go somewhere else. No one is happy with how this has gone down, and both sides need to make a compromise. Hopefully we end up with a deal that neither side is completely happy with, as that would likely mean it was a fair deal.

Where? Which University President is going to go back to the CUSA for less money and exposure? I don't see the bargaining power you seem to think the incoming schools possess.

(03-12-2013 07:33 AM)Hank Schrader Wrote:  Seriously, why should Navy share its money? If this conference fails before ever starting it will be because these new members want money they have not earned. Every other conference pays a decreased percentage to new members. Maybe the NNNNBE should do the same to drill in to some of your heads this isn't a charity.

I'm not saying that Navy should share its money, but that is part of being in a conference.

Florida and Vandy get the same amount of TV money from the SEC. Florida isn't allowed to keep it's TV money from the Florida State game.

UConn is a national power in BB and USF sucks, but they both get the same amount of conference BB TV revenue, right?

I just don't see what Navy really brings to the table if they are going to keep to themselves the biggest thing they bring to the table.

Let Navy walk, add Tulsa and/or UMass, and be done.

Funny that one game of navy's is worth more than the rest of our schools entire schedule

(03-11-2013 07:18 PM)ECUPirated Wrote:  Just a reminder to all what the Navy A.D. Gladchuck had to say about the Boise deal to return to the MWC.

So now the obvious question is......"Is Navy worth it?" If in fact Navy still commits to the new conference then will Gladchuck have the same views concerning the Midshipmen as he did with Boise when it comes to the Army/Navy game?

I would answer with yes they are worth it (remember before the Big East lost a single team Navy was far and away the number one expansion option for years).

The other issue with Navy that is different than any other instance discussed is their deals are pre-existing and run through 2018. It is much different than Boise who was shopping around ideas they were trying to set up (their own hoem games), or trying to get a piece of away games as well if that's what they were doing.

In Navy's case, they literally have to cancel higher paying TV slots with better exposure to take less money for the same games. That is a huge difference.