(04-10-2013 03:44 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Sounds like a way to pressure the Go5 conferences from inviting enough FCS move-ups to create a voting majority in the FBS.

If the SBC adds one more to go to 12, that will be 65 AQ and 65 non-AQ as of 2015. I have to think it really doesn't matter. If it were that disconcerting for the AQ's, they could very easily just call up a couple more schools and re-establish their majority. It's not like any school is going to hold out on principal. Besides, the G5 have already signed off on how the revenue is to be split.

(04-10-2013 03:43 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:32 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 02:34 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  All "G5" conferences are not promoting FCS schools. I've yet to see the BE/AAC invite an FCS school. They always get their teams from CUSA. I don't think the MWC has either, but I could be wrong.

UConn like Venus arose from the waters fully formed having never been in I-AA.

UConn is one of those border cases, since they were a 1-A independent when they joined the Old Big East, but they'd only been a 1-A football program for four years. If you reckon they'd never have promoted from 1-AA to 1-A without expecting to get into the Old Big East, its a kind of transition.

They only went independent because they had the Big East invite in hand.

So, no, not a border case. Big East added one FCS team, and tried to add another (Villanova).

(04-10-2013 02:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 02:14 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Going back to the overall revenue formula, something doesn't add up.

Of the $470M of revenue for the playoff, $125M comes off the top for:
APR - $300K/school = $39M
Independents - $200K/school + $4M for Notre Dame = $4.4M
FCS = $2M
Travel expenses for participants = ??
Expenses for BCS organization = ??
Appearance Bonuses for participants - $6M/school for semis and access spots = $36M

That leaves $43.6M for the travel expenses for the participants and the expenses of the BCS. Isn't that a little high for those two categories?

I'd kind of guess it'd be say 2-3 mil per team per game for travel expenses. If it's 3 mil, times 8, that's 24 million right there(remember 2 teams will play 2 games). 20 million for expenses of BCS?? I don't know.

Actually, it's 18 million and not 24. 2 games (4 teams) in round #1 and 1 game (2 teams) in the mythical but getting closer championship game. That's a total of 3 games - 6 teams....6 x 3m = 18 million. Thus 26 million for the other expenses.

(04-10-2013 02:30 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:57 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Gee seems like I pointed this out weeks ago that going to 12 wasn't going to increase the per team dollars for the current SBC teams.

no offense but it didn't take a rocket scientist to know the Power 5 weren't goning to keep raining millions of dollars on the Go5 conferences for promoting more FCS schools. I knew the Idaho AD was full of it (or that was a poorly interpreted / written article) as soon as I read that nonsense.

Another somewhat "less than informed" remark. The Go5 get the $86 million regardless of numbers in the Go5 conferences. The question is/was whether there would be a distribution of $1m per team or $12m per 12+ team conference from that $86 million. Regardless of the outcome, and regardless of the number of teams jumping from FCS to FBS, the $86 million isn't going up (and yes, it's a rolling number but it's the number used for these discussion purposes).

Still, even from the linked article, the $12m per conference cap is being discussed; the article didn't say it has already been determined. Unfortunately, with C-USA being the only conference north of 12 members it's likely to come about.

(04-10-2013 01:30 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:26 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:20 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So is this why the Sun Belt is so adamant on getting to 12 teams? To maximize the payout?

Seems it gave them a reason to add the two FB only members...which is probably a good thing overall.

At this point adding App State and Ga Southern hasn't really diluted the FBS ...and most of the other adds to FBS (Ga State, UTSA, USA, Texas State, ODU and Charlotte) appear to serious about being competitive from a monetary standpoint. But how many new schools can be added without serious dilution of the quality of programs at the lower levels. That will be at least 8 new schools added in less than a five year period.

That's where I was going. $1 million per team regardless of numbers. Why dilute with marginal just to get to 12 and have a championship game when no one has even heard of half the teams in your league.

Well...the conference gets its cut from each member. The more members you have up to 12 the more cuts the conference gets. There will also be more money to allocate towards travel expenses, which would help the western schools especially.

(04-10-2013 02:17 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:57 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The Sun Belt has pulled NMSU and Idaho out of the pit with the lions and gladiators to help get some TV leverage because we can do it without it costing us any money. (We were getting a million a team anyway so we take the extra to 12 then take some of it back for travel).

But remember that the Sunbelt needs eight full FBS members to be a Div1 conference. NMSU and Idaho FB-only starting in 2013 keeps the clock from starting to tick in 2013, and when WKY leaves, the clock only ticks for one month until Georgia State and Texas State finish their reclassification, August 1 2014. Indeed, the Sunbelt could have one more loss without its FBS eligibility being in danger.

With the FCS transitioning schools, its a big safety margin to have the two year grace period not start ticking until 2014. If you find out in June of one year that a school will be going next July, its already too late for an FCS school to be invited and complete its transition to replace that school inside the grace period.

I wonder what will happen this June...

(04-10-2013 04:08 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:44 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Sounds like a way to pressure the Go5 conferences from inviting enough FCS move-ups to create a voting majority in the FBS.

If the SBC adds one more to go to 12, that will be 65 AQ and 65 non-AQ as of 2015. I have to think it really doesn't matter. If it were that disconcerting for the AQ's, they could very easily just call up a couple more schools and re-establish their majority. It's not like any school is going to hold out on principal. Besides, the G5 have already signed off on how the revenue is to be split.

Yes, they would do that. But that also causes an overall increase in the number of FBS teams, which they don't want. They can invite more teams, but you run into diminishing returns both at the conference level and for the entire subdivision.

They're trying to head it off right now.

(04-10-2013 02:30 PM)billings Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:24 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 01:20 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So is this why the Sun Belt is so adamant on getting to 12 teams? To maximize the payout?

makes no sense in a lot of ways- no difference per team payout at 10 vs 12.

going to 12 gets you a CCG and a bit more TV money, plus it allows for division to cut travel costs in a spread out conference. Makes all the sense in the world. You can go to 12 and still see the same revenue per school. Go above 12, like CUSA and MAC, did and you see splits to each school cut.

this almost guarantees everyone in the G5 will try to hold at 12 as the ideal number to maximize revenue. I don't see anyway the sun belt, MWC or AAC goes over 12 members now

Remember, the G5 are discussing capping their growth at 12. It had not been agreed to yet, and even if they did, how is it even enforceable? Its not like its an NCAA rule. The article did not say what the K5 thought of this idea. Maybe they like it, maybe they would not. This discussion could be nothing other than the G5 teams worrying that they have diminished the FBS and themselves with recent call-ups. Just because they are anxious about what they have been doing does not mean they will stop. Panic chases reason away.

(04-10-2013 01:20 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So is this why the Sun Belt is so adamant on getting to 12 teams? To maximize the payout?

It gives the conference administrators more revenues to manage. Also, you don't want to be the only league without a championship game from a perception and tv standpoint.

(04-10-2013 04:48 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:43 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:32 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 02:34 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  All "G5" conferences are not promoting FCS schools. I've yet to see the BE/AAC invite an FCS school. They always get their teams from CUSA. I don't think the MWC has either, but I could be wrong.

UConn like Venus arose from the waters fully formed having never been in I-AA.

UConn is one of those border cases, since they were a 1-A independent when they joined the Old Big East, but they'd only been a 1-A football program for four years. If you reckon they'd never have promoted from 1-AA to 1-A without expecting to get into the Old Big East, its a kind of transition.

They only went independent because they had the Big East invite in hand.

So, no, not a border case. Big East added one FCS team, and tried to add another (Villanova).

They clearly added an FCS school. However, its a little different in that they were founding members of the conference in every other sport but football. Its not like they added some random FCS school that happened to be in the footprint. If Charlotte had never left and had been olympic sports members of CUSA continuously since its inception---people would look at thier addition differently I think.

(04-10-2013 06:32 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 04:08 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:44 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Sounds like a way to pressure the Go5 conferences from inviting enough FCS move-ups to create a voting majority in the FBS.

If the SBC adds one more to go to 12, that will be 65 AQ and 65 non-AQ as of 2015. I have to think it really doesn't matter. If it were that disconcerting for the AQ's, they could very easily just call up a couple more schools and re-establish their majority. It's not like any school is going to hold out on principal. Besides, the G5 have already signed off on how the revenue is to be split.

Yes, they would do that. But that also causes an overall increase in the number of FBS teams, which they don't want. They can invite more teams, but you run into diminishing returns both at the conference level and for the entire subdivision.

They're trying to head it off right now.

Thats why I wish the G5 would do something for CUSA and the Sunbelt to make a merger make sense. Say, allow them to keep both conference full shares as they currently stand. Thats 12 million + 12 million. So CUSA would receive 24 million every year. Thats what the Sunbelt and CUSA would have recieved anyway---but no new FCS schools move up. Even though CUSA would only have 18-20 members, they stay at 24 million. That would allow them to eliminate much of the affects of the dilution of the TV contract. I would think the extra inventory and markets might increase the contract at least a little bit-say 4 million. The savings from a more compact travel schedule would probably more than offset the rest of the lower per school earnings. Every G5 member gains by not letting FBS become too bloated.

(04-10-2013 07:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 06:32 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 04:08 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:44 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Sounds like a way to pressure the Go5 conferences from inviting enough FCS move-ups to create a voting majority in the FBS.

If the SBC adds one more to go to 12, that will be 65 AQ and 65 non-AQ as of 2015. I have to think it really doesn't matter. If it were that disconcerting for the AQ's, they could very easily just call up a couple more schools and re-establish their majority. It's not like any school is going to hold out on principal. Besides, the G5 have already signed off on how the revenue is to be split.

Yes, they would do that. But that also causes an overall increase in the number of FBS teams, which they don't want. They can invite more teams, but you run into diminishing returns both at the conference level and for the entire subdivision.

They're trying to head it off right now.

Thats why I wish the G5 would do something for CUSA and the Sunbelt to make a merger make sense. Say, allow them to keep both conference full shares as they currently stand. Thats 12 million + 12 million. So CUSA would receive 24 million every year. Thats what the Sunbelt and CUSA would have recieved anyway---but no new FCS schools move up. Even though CUSA would only have 18-20 members, they stay at 24 million. That would allow them to eliminate much of the affects of the dilution of the TV contract. I would think the extra inventory and markets might increase the contract at least a little bit-say 4 million. The savings from a more compact travel schedule would probably more than offset the rest of the lower per school earnings. Every G5 member gains by not letting FBS become too bloated.

Your numbers are wrong. The Sunbelt is at 11 and CUSA is at 14. That's 25 members not 18-20.

(04-10-2013 08:43 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 07:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 06:32 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 04:08 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 03:44 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  Sounds like a way to pressure the Go5 conferences from inviting enough FCS move-ups to create a voting majority in the FBS.

If the SBC adds one more to go to 12, that will be 65 AQ and 65 non-AQ as of 2015. I have to think it really doesn't matter. If it were that disconcerting for the AQ's, they could very easily just call up a couple more schools and re-establish their majority. It's not like any school is going to hold out on principal. Besides, the G5 have already signed off on how the revenue is to be split.

Yes, they would do that. But that also causes an overall increase in the number of FBS teams, which they don't want. They can invite more teams, but you run into diminishing returns both at the conference level and for the entire subdivision.

They're trying to head it off right now.

Thats why I wish the G5 would do something for CUSA and the Sunbelt to make a merger make sense. Say, allow them to keep both conference full shares as they currently stand. Thats 12 million + 12 million. So CUSA would receive 24 million every year. Thats what the Sunbelt and CUSA would have recieved anyway---but no new FCS schools move up. Even though CUSA would only have 18-20 members, they stay at 24 million. That would allow them to eliminate much of the affects of the dilution of the TV contract. I would think the extra inventory and markets might increase the contract at least a little bit-say 4 million. The savings from a more compact travel schedule would probably more than offset the rest of the lower per school earnings. Every G5 member gains by not letting FBS become too bloated.

Your numbers are wrong. The Sunbelt is at 11 and CUSA is at 14. That's 25 members not 18-20.

The merger I'm suggesting would include no move ups. Its not so much a merger as it is an absorption of the remaining FBS members of the Sunbelt and a dissolving of the comference. The Sunbelt would not exist, thus some of the planned the Sunbelt move ups would have to stay in FCS. The schools that have already transitioned would be probably have to be included. Too many legal issues otherwise. That would make it a more manageable number. Plus I suspect the AAC will lose a few more schools before this is all said and done.

Gotta think the conferences that are going "doh!" with a face palm right now are the MAC and C-USA.

(04-10-2013 06:10 PM)WinOrLoseEAGLE Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 02:19 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 02:14 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Going back to the overall revenue formula, something doesn't add up.

Of the $470M of revenue for the playoff, $125M comes off the top for:
APR - $300K/school = $39M
Independents - $200K/school + $4M for Notre Dame = $4.4M
FCS = $2M
Travel expenses for participants = ??
Expenses for BCS organization = ??
Appearance Bonuses for participants - $6M/school for semis and access spots = $36M

That leaves $43.6M for the travel expenses for the participants and the expenses of the BCS. Isn't that a little high for those two categories?

I'd kind of guess it'd be say 2-3 mil per team per game for travel expenses. If it's 3 mil, times 8, that's 24 million right there(remember 2 teams will play 2 games). 20 million for expenses of BCS?? I don't know.

Actually, it's 18 million and not 24. 2 games (4 teams) in round #1 and 1 game (2 teams) in the mythical but getting closer championship game. That's a total of 3 games - 6 teams....6 x 3m = 18 million. Thus 26 million for the other expenses.

It's access bowls as well..
year 1- Rose/Sugar- 4 semi spots, 6 access spots- 2 final spots- 12 spots.
year2 Orange/access- 4 semi spots, 4 access spots- 2 final spots- 10 spots
year 3- access/access- 4 semi spots, 2 access spots- 2 final spots- 8 spots

so like year 1- 36 million in travel costs, 7.6 mil for other costs.
year 2- 30 million in travel costs, 13.6 mil for other costs
year 3- 24 million in travel costs, 19.6 mil for other costs

I could see the 3 year average for other costs being around 13-14 million pretty easily.

(04-10-2013 09:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The merger I'm suggesting would include no move ups. Its not so much a merger as it is an absorption of the remaining FBS members of the Sunbelt and a dissolving of the comference. The Sunbelt would not exist, thus some of the planned the Sunbelt move ups would have to stay in FCS.

I think that would've been the most logical solution for CUSA & SBC to merge before promoting ODU, Charlotte, App & the 2 GSU's. Of course that might have made some sense. UALR & UTA could've easily gone to the SLC.

(04-10-2013 09:48 PM)apex_pirate Wrote:  Gotta think the conferences that are going "doh!" with a face palm right now are the MAC and C-USA.

The MAC's not hurt too much by it. 12 million/13 teams=923k per team. C-USA on the other hand.....

(04-10-2013 09:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 08:43 PM)GoAppsGo92 Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 07:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 06:32 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  

(04-10-2013 04:08 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  If the SBC adds one more to go to 12, that will be 65 AQ and 65 non-AQ as of 2015. I have to think it really doesn't matter. If it were that disconcerting for the AQ's, they could very easily just call up a couple more schools and re-establish their majority. It's not like any school is going to hold out on principal. Besides, the G5 have already signed off on how the revenue is to be split.

Yes, they would do that. But that also causes an overall increase in the number of FBS teams, which they don't want. They can invite more teams, but you run into diminishing returns both at the conference level and for the entire subdivision.

They're trying to head it off right now.

Thats why I wish the G5 would do something for CUSA and the Sunbelt to make a merger make sense. Say, allow them to keep both conference full shares as they currently stand. Thats 12 million + 12 million. So CUSA would receive 24 million every year. Thats what the Sunbelt and CUSA would have recieved anyway---but no new FCS schools move up. Even though CUSA would only have 18-20 members, they stay at 24 million. That would allow them to eliminate much of the affects of the dilution of the TV contract. I would think the extra inventory and markets might increase the contract at least a little bit-say 4 million. The savings from a more compact travel schedule would probably more than offset the rest of the lower per school earnings. Every G5 member gains by not letting FBS become too bloated.

Your numbers are wrong. The Sunbelt is at 11 and CUSA is at 14. That's 25 members not 18-20.

The merger I'm suggesting would include no move ups. Its not so much a merger as it is an absorption of the remaining FBS members of the Sunbelt and a dissolving of the comference. The Sunbelt would not exist, thus some of the planned the Sunbelt move ups would have to stay in FCS. The schools that have already transitioned would be probably have to be included. Too many legal issues otherwise. That would make it a more manageable number. Plus I suspect the AAC will lose a few more schools before this is all said and done.

Too late for that friend. Paperwork has been filed, transitions begun at ODU, UNCC, GSU and AppState.

Right now if they have any sense, AAC, CUSA and Sun Belt are all saying "doh" they all have crappy footprints that extend across creation.

All three currently have patch the boat line-ups.

Why?

First realignment has happened at a slow enough pace to create that environment. You lose one or two so you grab one or two or three or four (or six) to plug the holes. Then you lose schools again and who you added to balance out a team or help a team is still there so you have to add again.

Second reason is you have three guys who have good jobs who want to keep them. Aresco's interest wasn't creating an east coast league of like-minded schools. It was to patch up a TV deal and hold on to AQ status. The AQ status went away and with it the special value that brought to TV (knowing the champ was absolutely going to be in one of the BCS bowls so the conference race was special). That meant grabbing everything with any TV value of note (interestingly only ONE of his four out-of-region additions were deemed key by TV and one of three in-region). Bankowsky needed to help Marshall and ECU out on an island and do something about losing teams like Houston and UCF who draw good crowds in great markets and Memphis who produces good basketball TV value and lots of NCAA units). So he patched and patched. Benson needed to stay in business.

All three leagues are patchworks and none of them have a leadership that sees it to be in their best interest to pull aside the cream of their disparate regions and tell them they need to pull out a map and start calling the schools within their region to figure out who might be compatible and set off on their own.

There are three potential models that can happen:
1. A top tier league spanning the regions, a mid-tier spanning the region, an entry league that spans the regions.
2. A top tier league that spans the regions and two other leagues with less prestige that are geographically sensible.
3. Two upper tier regional leagues and one entry league that spans the regions.

Model 1 is what we have, it is inefficient for travel and building rivalries and fan interest. The TV dollars produced are not significant.
Model 2 is where I think we are headed if CUSA does go to 16. Whether CUSA East and West actually break apart and fill in with some regional teams remains to be seen but if they go to 16 they are making a statement (intentional or not) that they are willing to work together for TV and championship events but they really don't care if they ever play teams from the other division (conference).
Model 3 is the one that provides the greatest economic benefit. The highest value teams in region maximizing bowls and TV and one league that will be even worse off financially than the Sun Belt is today.

There's a lot of faulty math here because it is working in a vacuum and not accounting for the entire picture.

There is more to the picture than CFP money.

Let's say Conference A is at 14, B is at 12, and C is at 16

In CFP money A is worth $857,000 per team, B $1 million and C $750,000

But if A averages 2 NCAA units earned per year, B averages 1, and C averages 3 what does that do to the equation?

A is worth $1.09, B is worth $1.14, C is worth $1.07

That's before you inject TV dollars, CFP ranking dollars, and CFP appearance dollars.

But let's back up to that first line which was just CFP dollars the gap between the best per team and worst is equal to selling 600 more tickets in football and basketball per game a reachable number if the worst per team is regionalized and the best isn't. By the time you inject the other factors if you increase ticket sales and cut your travel cost your athletic department has more spendable money even if the amount in the check at the end of the year from the conference is smaller.