I wouldn't be surprised if the MWC took a significant pay cut, just as CUSA did the last go around. They'll be lucky to get 1M per school.

(04-25-2019 11:45 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  I wouldn't be surprised if the MWC took a significant pay cut, just as CUSA did the last go around. They'll be lucky to get 1M per school.

I dont see that. Per Thompson, they have already been offered an extension at the current rate---so I dont see a pay cut. My guess is they get a small raise to about 20-25 million for the whole conference. At 20 million, thats about 1.7 million a team with Boise getting 3.5 million. Hawaii does not participate in the MW media deal (they have a separate deal for about 2.4 million a year with Oceanic PPV).

(04-25-2019 12:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 11:45 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  I wouldn't be surprised if the MWC took a significant pay cut, just as CUSA did the last go around. They'll be lucky to get 1M per school.

I dont see that. Per Thompson, they have already been offered an extension at the current rate---so I dont see a pay cut. My guess is they get a small raise to about 20-25 million for the whole conference. At 20 million, thats about 1.7 million a team with Boise getting 3.5 million. Hawaii does not participate in the MW media deal (they have a separate deal for about 2.4 million a year with Oceanic PPV).

agreed CBSSN wants the MWC property and ESPN+ wants the leftovers...I could see them pulling 25 million per year for the whole conference.

That potential BeIn and Facebook money is going to their heads.

1. Who cares what the MWC thinks. Their deal will be less than half what we got with much worse exposure and time slots that only the living dead will ever see.

2. ESPN owns most of all the college football rights. They already know that if Texas leaves the Big 12 that they will need to repackage it... and that is why they weren't ever going to let the AAC go out of their grip. The length of the deal is moot since ESPN can move all the pieces it wants. We dont know the specifics of the contract but I guarantee there is something in there about if a certain number of teams leave then the contract is renegotiated. If the B12 does lose OU and Tejas then the AAC will get picked over for at least 4 teams and possibly more.

3. The deal we really need to be looking at is BYU. If they dont get a raise and are still in the $6 million a year range, then joining the AAC becomes more attractive. We already know Boise isnt getting anywhere near $7 million a year, and I wouldnt be shocked if the MWC give the finger to ESPN again that their best pieces are added to the AAC.
Lets be honest, most of their conference is hot garbage that nobody really wants but a few choice pieces could add value. if BYU doesnt get a raise, I can see them along with Boise St talking to us.... and then Air Force will get real interested too. Not certain who would be #16 but I tend to like CSU or SDSU. For travel sake, I hope its CSU.

We got a decent deal. With NCAA credits, playoff money and everything else, each of our teams will bring in $10-11 million a year. The ACC makes about 2.5 times that. Sounds bad but we were bringing in about 1/5th of the ACC until this deal was made.

Now what we need to be focusing on is the playoff and distributions there. We cannot continue to be lumped in to the G5. Especially if the MWC gets something like $2-3 million a year and were at $7. We literally would be making more per team than the entire average sum of all the G4.

At that point I think we push hard with the P5 to get a larger share of the playoff money... and I guarantee no other G5 conference will get any extra. Were making a separation from them with this deal.

If we can expand with BYU and Boise, then all bets are off. We cannot be called G5 at that point... hell, we really cant be called that now but you see my point. I am REALLY looking forward to seeing what happens once ESPN gets their chance to bid and the BYU deal is done. There may be a small G5 conference realignment coming.

(04-25-2019 12:25 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  1. Who cares what the MWC thinks. Their deal will be less than half what we got with much worse exposure and time slots that only the living dead will ever see.

2. ESPN owns most of all the college football rights. They already know that if Texas leaves the Big 12 that they will need to repackage it... and that is why they weren't ever going to let the AAC go out of their grip. The length of the deal is moot since ESPN can move all the pieces it wants. We dont know the specifics of the contract but I guarantee there is something in there about if a certain number of teams leave then the contract is renegotiated. If the B12 does lose OU and Tejas then the AAC will get picked over for at least 4 teams and possibly more.

3. The deal we really need to be looking at is BYU. If they dont get a raise and are still in the $6 million a year range, then joining the AAC becomes more attractive. We already know Boise isnt getting anywhere near $7 million a year, and I wouldnt be shocked if the MWC give the finger to ESPN again that their best pieces are added to the AAC.
Lets be honest, most of their conference is hot garbage that nobody really wants but a few choice pieces could add value. if BYU doesnt get a raise, I can see them along with Boise St talking to us.... and then Air Force will get real interested too. Not certain who would be #16 but I tend to like CSU or SDSU. For travel sake, I hope its CSU.

We got a decent deal. With NCAA credits, playoff money and everything else, each of our teams will bring in $10-11 million a year. The ACC makes about 2.5 times that. Sounds bad but we were bringing in about 1/5th of the ACC until this deal was made.

Now what we need to be focusing on is the playoff and distributions there. We cannot continue to be lumped in to the G5. Especially if the MWC gets something like $2-3 million a year and were at $7. We literally would be making more per team than the entire average sum of all the G4.

At that point I think we push hard with the P5 to get a larger share of the playoff money... and I guarantee no other G5 conference will get any extra. Were making a separation from them with this deal.

If we can expand with BYU and Boise, then all bets are off. We cannot be called G5 at that point... hell, we really cant be called that now but you see my point. I am REALLY looking forward to seeing what happens once ESPN gets their chance to bid and the BYU deal is done. There may be a small G5 conference realignment coming.

no to Boise.

add BYU and Army football only...

(04-25-2019 09:23 AM)Radicalman7 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 08:37 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 07:41 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 07:32 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  Nobody cares about the MWC. Except for Boise, I’ll give them that although what have they really done that’s so special since leaving the deadbeat WAC.

When/if San Diego State completes the Mission Valley project, I’d be willing to take another look at them. And if we ever get Army to join as football-only, I’d consider Air Force as a football-only, to have all 3 of the military academies. I think that would have some real value and interest to fans and media.

But other than that, there just isn’t much there in the Mtn. that’s worth our time. Hard pass on Boise State.

No to any MW schools joining the AAC... And the article is corrector about 12 years being too long... and oh BTW, that six years look in is worthless, that implies the AAC getting a pay cut if there is membership change or failure to meet expectations... NO RAISE!!!

SHOULD HAVE SIGNED GOR!!!

That lookin is reality for both parties. If the conference continues to outperform expectations and is not affected by realignment, then the conference needs to be compensated early considering the length of the contract. On the other hand if the league suffers from realignment there is no way that espn is going to want to not reduce payout to a conference that may lose some of its best universities.

That sounds like a fair way to write a contract (Beneficial to both parties), however, we all know that that is not the way it works with ESPN, if it did they would have included the 2019-20 year in the 12 year term of the new contract....

I strongly believe that a GOR would have generated an additional 2-4 millions per team.

And I strongly believe, as I have stated before, that the BIG XII is not expanding with AAC teams if it doses decide to expand (See disaster that PAC-12 is becoming), which it won't...

Someone check my math real quick, if ya want.

The last two years of income for the AAC have been about $75 million and $80 million. So lets average that to $77.5 million. This is total revenue including TV deal, NCAA credits, Playoff money, bowl money and all.

If we remove the $20 million we got from our old tv deal, then its about $57.5 million. Divide that by 12 teams (I count navy and WSU as 1 total member) and it breaks down to $4.792 million. The new TV deal pays out roughly $7 million per team. So we can expect an income of about $11.8 million per year.

Looking at the lowest income conferences in the P5, the ACC made about $29 million per school and the Pac 12 was a bit under that.

So the hierarchy until 2025 is
Big 10, SEC, Texas and Notre Dame in the $40-50 million range
Big 12 in the mid $30 million range (counting their 3rd tier deals)
ACC and Pac 12 in the Mid to high $20 million

AAC at almost $12 million

MWC expected to have a total of about $4-5 million
and all else will be under $2-3

We may not be P5, but we sure as hell arent G5 anymore.

Now if we can get a bigger share of the playoff money in the next round and a decent paying championship game....

(04-25-2019 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 12:25 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  1. Who cares what the MWC thinks. Their deal will be less than half what we got with much worse exposure and time slots that only the living dead will ever see.

2. ESPN owns most of all the college football rights. They already know that if Texas leaves the Big 12 that they will need to repackage it... and that is why they weren't ever going to let the AAC go out of their grip. The length of the deal is moot since ESPN can move all the pieces it wants. We dont know the specifics of the contract but I guarantee there is something in there about if a certain number of teams leave then the contract is renegotiated. If the B12 does lose OU and Tejas then the AAC will get picked over for at least 4 teams and possibly more.

3. The deal we really need to be looking at is BYU. If they dont get a raise and are still in the $6 million a year range, then joining the AAC becomes more attractive. We already know Boise isnt getting anywhere near $7 million a year, and I wouldnt be shocked if the MWC give the finger to ESPN again that their best pieces are added to the AAC.
Lets be honest, most of their conference is hot garbage that nobody really wants but a few choice pieces could add value. if BYU doesnt get a raise, I can see them along with Boise St talking to us.... and then Air Force will get real interested too. Not certain who would be #16 but I tend to like CSU or SDSU. For travel sake, I hope its CSU.

We got a decent deal. With NCAA credits, playoff money and everything else, each of our teams will bring in $10-11 million a year. The ACC makes about 2.5 times that. Sounds bad but we were bringing in about 1/5th of the ACC until this deal was made.

Now what we need to be focusing on is the playoff and distributions there. We cannot continue to be lumped in to the G5. Especially if the MWC gets something like $2-3 million a year and were at $7. We literally would be making more per team than the entire average sum of all the G4.

At that point I think we push hard with the P5 to get a larger share of the playoff money... and I guarantee no other G5 conference will get any extra. Were making a separation from them with this deal.

If we can expand with BYU and Boise, then all bets are off. We cannot be called G5 at that point... hell, we really cant be called that now but you see my point. I am REALLY looking forward to seeing what happens once ESPN gets their chance to bid and the BYU deal is done. There may be a small G5 conference realignment coming.

no to Boise.

add BYU and Army football only...

I dont really have a dog in the fight... I only care that it elevates us to P6 and we get more money. I know that Air Force was offered a spot in the B12 in the first major realignment back when the Big East broke up. So there is value there.
Id be fine with BYU and Air Force only... but I would take them for all sports. Why not give a travel break to our western schools... and BYU basketball has been good in the past.

Army I am not certain will ever join but I do think we should sign a scheduling agreement with them. Why not have 6 games a year with them.

(04-25-2019 12:30 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 09:23 AM)Radicalman7 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 08:37 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 07:41 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 07:32 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  Nobody cares about the MWC. Except for Boise, I’ll give them that although what have they really done that’s so special since leaving the deadbeat WAC.

When/if San Diego State completes the Mission Valley project, I’d be willing to take another look at them. And if we ever get Army to join as football-only, I’d consider Air Force as a football-only, to have all 3 of the military academies. I think that would have some real value and interest to fans and media.

But other than that, there just isn’t much there in the Mtn. that’s worth our time. Hard pass on Boise State.

No to any MW schools joining the AAC... And the article is corrector about 12 years being too long... and oh BTW, that six years look in is worthless, that implies the AAC getting a pay cut if there is membership change or failure to meet expectations... NO RAISE!!!

SHOULD HAVE SIGNED GOR!!!

That lookin is reality for both parties. If the conference continues to outperform expectations and is not affected by realignment, then the conference needs to be compensated early considering the length of the contract. On the other hand if the league suffers from realignment there is no way that espn is going to want to not reduce payout to a conference that may lose some of its best universities.

That sounds like a fair way to write a contract (Beneficial to both parties), however, we all know that that is not the way it works with ESPN, if it did they would have included the 2019-20 year in the 12 year term of the new contract....

I strongly believe that a GOR would have generated an additional 2-4 millions per team.

And I strongly believe, as I have stated before, that the BIG VII is not expanding with AAC teams if it doses decide to expand (See disaster that PAC-12 is becoming), which it won't...

As I posted a few post back, I just don't see a lot of value for a GOR for the AAC. ESPN knows there's no threat of any school in the conference being plucked up by a P5 until the mid 2020s at the earlier (and you go on to admit you believe any change in the P5 landscape will not include a school from this conference). There's no way they would pay an extra $48M to the conference for what is a sure bet.

(04-25-2019 12:49 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 12:30 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 09:23 AM)Radicalman7 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 08:37 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 07:41 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  When/if San Diego State completes the Mission Valley project, I’d be willing to take another look at them. And if we ever get Army to join as football-only, I’d consider Air Force as a football-only, to have all 3 of the military academies. I think that would have some real value and interest to fans and media.

But other than that, there just isn’t much there in the Mtn. that’s worth our time. Hard pass on Boise State.

No to any MW schools joining the AAC... And the article is corrector about 12 years being too long... and oh BTW, that six years look in is worthless, that implies the AAC getting a pay cut if there is membership change or failure to meet expectations... NO RAISE!!!

SHOULD HAVE SIGNED GOR!!!

That lookin is reality for both parties. If the conference continues to outperform expectations and is not affected by realignment, then the conference needs to be compensated early considering the length of the contract. On the other hand if the league suffers from realignment there is no way that espn is going to want to not reduce payout to a conference that may lose some of its best universities.

That sounds like a fair way to write a contract (Beneficial to both parties), however, we all know that that is not the way it works with ESPN, if it did they would have included the 2019-20 year in the 12 year term of the new contract....

I strongly believe that a GOR would have generated an additional 2-4 millions per team.

And I strongly believe, as I have stated before, that the BIG VII is not expanding with AAC teams if it doses decide to expand (See disaster that PAC-12 is becoming), which it won't...

As I posted a few post back, I just don't see a lot of value for a GOR for the AAC. ESPN knows there's no threat of any school in the conference being plucked up by a P5 until the mid 2020s at the earlier (and you go on to admit you believe any change in the P5 landscape will not include a school from this conference). There's no way they would pay an extra $48M to the conference for what is a sure bet.

I agree. Its not like ESPN doesnt control every conference that would have any interest in an AAC team. A GOR wasn'
t going to get us anymore money and would have only complicated ESPN moving pieces if it needs to down the road.

(04-25-2019 12:25 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  1. Who cares what the MWC thinks. Their deal will be less than half what we got with much worse exposure and time slots that only the living dead will ever see.

2. ESPN owns most of all the college football rights. They already know that if Texas leaves the Big 12 that they will need to repackage it... and that is why they weren't ever going to let the AAC go out of their grip. The length of the deal is moot since ESPN can move all the pieces it wants. We dont know the specifics of the contract but I guarantee there is something in there about if a certain number of teams leave then the contract is renegotiated. If the B12 does lose OU and Tejas then the AAC will get picked over for at least 4 teams and possibly more.

3. The deal we really need to be looking at is BYU. If they dont get a raise and are still in the $6 million a year range, then joining the AAC becomes more attractive. We already know Boise isnt getting anywhere near $7 million a year, and I wouldnt be shocked if the MWC give the finger to ESPN again that their best pieces are added to the AAC.
Lets be honest, most of their conference is hot garbage that nobody really wants but a few choice pieces could add value. if BYU doesnt get a raise, I can see them along with Boise St talking to us.... and then Air Force will get real interested too. Not certain who would be #16 but I tend to like CSU or SDSU. For travel sake, I hope its CSU.

We got a decent deal. With NCAA credits, playoff money and everything else, each of our teams will bring in $10-11 million a year. The ACC makes about 2.5 times that. Sounds bad but we were bringing in about 1/5th of the ACC until this deal was made.

Now what we need to be focusing on is the playoff and distributions there. We cannot continue to be lumped in to the G5. Especially if the MWC gets something like $2-3 million a year and were at $7. We literally would be making more per team than the entire average sum of all the G4.

At that point I think we push hard with the P5 to get a larger share of the playoff money... and I guarantee no other G5 conference will get any extra. Were making a separation from them with this deal.

If we can expand with BYU and Boise, then all bets are off. We cannot be called G5 at that point... hell, we really cant be called that now but you see my point. I am REALLY looking forward to seeing what happens once ESPN gets their chance to bid and the BYU deal is done. There may be a small G5 conference realignment coming.

I noticed that Aresco has mentioned several times that there will be other sources of revenue before the end of this TV deal. Its worth noting that the AAC "look in" occurs in 6 years---interestingly--at the exact same time the "look in" occurs the current CFP will be expiring. Dont be surprised if the "look in" is related to ESPN bidding on a contract bowl for the AAC---and if that contract bowl dosnt materialize----the AAC media deal gets bumped up. Such a clause would be very similar to the way the ACC deal had a automatic contract bump if ESPN didnt create an ACC Network by a certain date.

(04-25-2019 02:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 12:25 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  1. Who cares what the MWC thinks. Their deal will be less than half what we got with much worse exposure and time slots that only the living dead will ever see.

2. ESPN owns most of all the college football rights. They already know that if Texas leaves the Big 12 that they will need to repackage it... and that is why they weren't ever going to let the AAC go out of their grip. The length of the deal is moot since ESPN can move all the pieces it wants. We dont know the specifics of the contract but I guarantee there is something in there about if a certain number of teams leave then the contract is renegotiated. If the B12 does lose OU and Tejas then the AAC will get picked over for at least 4 teams and possibly more.

3. The deal we really need to be looking at is BYU. If they dont get a raise and are still in the $6 million a year range, then joining the AAC becomes more attractive. We already know Boise isnt getting anywhere near $7 million a year, and I wouldnt be shocked if the MWC give the finger to ESPN again that their best pieces are added to the AAC.
Lets be honest, most of their conference is hot garbage that nobody really wants but a few choice pieces could add value. if BYU doesnt get a raise, I can see them along with Boise St talking to us.... and then Air Force will get real interested too. Not certain who would be #16 but I tend to like CSU or SDSU. For travel sake, I hope its CSU.

We got a decent deal. With NCAA credits, playoff money and everything else, each of our teams will bring in $10-11 million a year. The ACC makes about 2.5 times that. Sounds bad but we were bringing in about 1/5th of the ACC until this deal was made.

Now what we need to be focusing on is the playoff and distributions there. We cannot continue to be lumped in to the G5. Especially if the MWC gets something like $2-3 million a year and were at $7. We literally would be making more per team than the entire average sum of all the G4.

At that point I think we push hard with the P5 to get a larger share of the playoff money... and I guarantee no other G5 conference will get any extra. Were making a separation from them with this deal.

If we can expand with BYU and Boise, then all bets are off. We cannot be called G5 at that point... hell, we really cant be called that now but you see my point. I am REALLY looking forward to seeing what happens once ESPN gets their chance to bid and the BYU deal is done. There may be a small G5 conference realignment coming.

I noticed that Aresco has mentioned several times that there will be other sources of revenue before the end of this TV deal. Its worth noting that the AAC "look in" occurs in 6 years---interestingly--at the exact same time the "look in" occurs the current CFP will be expiring. Dont be surprised if the "look in" is related to ESPN bidding on a contract bowl for the AAC---and if that contract bowl dosnt materialize----the AAC media deal gets bumped up. Such a clause would be very similar to the way the ACC deal had a automatic contract bump if ESPN didnt create an ACC Network by a certain date.

Very interesting theory I must say.

The lookin is setup as protection for ESPN. It isn't for...hey guys, you're doing great and we will like to offer $5 million each more just for the fun of it. They have us in a contract until 2030. They know expansion is a possibility in 2025 and this is clearly protection.

(04-25-2019 03:04 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The lookin is setup as protection for ESPN. It isn't for...hey guys, you're doing great and we will like to offer $5 million each more just for the fun of it. They have us in a contract until 2030. They know expansion is a possibility in 2025 and this is clearly protection.

That makes little to no sense that it would be one way. Where are you getting this?

ESPN; You want a 6y deal
AAC; YES
ESPN; We gonna need a GOR
AAC; Hell no!
ESPN; Well we gonna need 12 years for the money you asking.
AAC: Thats a long ass-time! And you still not paying us what we are worth!
ESPN; Yeah, sooo...
AAC; How bout we do a lookin at 6 in case of no movement and we exceed expectations
ESPN;Yeah as long as we can make payout changes if the conference members change.
AAC; Well I guess we good for now.

My guess is that ESPN is gonna make money off of ESPN+, and the AAC will probably be a major factor if the service does outperform expectations. At that point a lookin is a no-brainer for the league cause the financial upside for ESPN could be huge.

The MWC could actually break apart and cause a realignment scenario given the current internal pressures, disagreements, and diverging goals.

With the current line ups, I could see BYU pulling off something they had initially tried with the WAC.

The western teams add NMST all sports, BYU, Gonzaga, and St. Mary's for Olympics. If Hawaii wants to stay big west, add Universtiy of San Fransisco or Grand Canyon so you have 10. BYU agrees to a schedule of two games in November and adds its bowl ties in. Strong basketball, decent football, six game schedule so an.opportunity for 6 OOC games played early in the season. Late starts aren't an issue, huge Cali footprint. Basketball gives you a surging Nevada, UNLV, SDSU, improving Fresno, NMST, and the cream of the WCC. Football will have opportunities to impress, can do buy games or get some crucial p5 home games, flexibility to schedule to the school. SDSU, UNLV, Hawaii should attract some good opponents in particular.

Frontrange schools agree to the Boise St sweetheart deal and add North Texas, Rice, UTEP, and UTSA for ten all sports membership, focused on football. Split to divisions with New Mexico linking up with the Texas Schools and keeping an 8 game schedule with a championship game. Weak on the basketball side they will move into the central time zone and get some in roads into Texas in pretty much every major city.

(04-25-2019 03:53 PM)Radicalman7 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 03:04 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The lookin is setup as protection for ESPN. It isn't for...hey guys, you're doing great and we will like to offer $5 million each more just for the fun of it. They have us in a contract until 2030. They know expansion is a possibility in 2025 and this is clearly protection.

That makes little to no sense that it would be one way. Where are you getting this?

Makes perfect sense. The look-in isn't for just handing us more money when they have 6 years remaining. Disney isn't stupid. Who knows about the landscape in 6 years.

(04-25-2019 07:37 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 03:53 PM)Radicalman7 Wrote:  

(04-25-2019 03:04 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  The lookin is setup as protection for ESPN. It isn't for...hey guys, you're doing great and we will like to offer $5 million each more just for the fun of it. They have us in a contract until 2030. They know expansion is a possibility in 2025 and this is clearly protection.

That makes little to no sense that it would be one way. Where are you getting this?

Makes perfect sense. The look-in isn't for just handing us more money when they have 6 years remaining. Disney isn't stupid. Who knows about the landscape in 6 years.

It’s obvious what’s its for, not sure why people don’t get it.

If the Big 12 gets stripped, ESPN can send 6 or 7 AAC teams to backfill it and go back to paying the AAC 1 mil a year if that. The money they save with the lookin would be sent directly to the media deal with the the new quasi Big 12. Eliminates a tweener conference by consolidating and saves ESPN money, easy as that.

We aren’t getting a sudden raise in 2025.