(06-07-2016 02:34 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  MTowho its not all about Money. I mean yes in the end it matters but its about perception and over all disadvantages like recruiting, exposure etc. I bet you 500K is like ~1.5% of ODU athletic expenses but its the other things that bother me. If its just about money and if i were ODU Admin i would invest some money on inhouse digital media and stream everything and tell these media bastards to scram and earn more than that for sure. Right now with horrible streaming our MonarchMedia makes about 70k an year and i bet i can more than double that if i stream everything off of it and make it better. Anyways this deal stinks

Perception? I think it's pretty clear to everyone paying attention that TV revenue is going to drop for all of us, and we were the unlucky first ones to have to renegotiate. Exposure? We're getting the exposure, just not the money. I have no idea what you are talking about there. Digital Media? Sounds like you have a personal bias with ODU that doesn't really apply to the conference as a whole.

Edit: Recruiting? "Hey Recruit, you can see us play on ESPN, CBS Sports, beIN sports, and ASN" ???

(06-07-2016 01:56 PM)MTowho Wrote:  The facts are, each school is losing about $500k from their annual revenue. If you can't handle that through scheduling changes or other fundraising or budget cuts, you probably need to drop to FCS. I believe our administration was proactive in that we're playing an extra guarantee game this season to help offset that, with only 5 home games.

The $6.5M in exit fees doesn't count in this argument - all of our athletic departments knew when that would dry up and should have budgeted appropriately, so really we're just talking $9.95M vs $2.8M.

As far as it being "walk away" money, you should consider the fact that you're in a conference, which provides efficiencies as far as scheduling and other expense savings, bowl opportunities, etc. Again, if a $500k per year cut is a deal breaker when we all knew, and our administrations sure as **** knew it was coming, well then, adios.

To me, this just furthers the argument that CUSA needs to double down its efforts in basketball. We need NCAA tournament units.

I dont think anyone was suggesting (in this thread anyways) to walk away from CUSA.

Just suggesting it was walking away money in the sense that CUSA should have walked away and said no thanks.

The way the yo-yo's bouncing... next week we'll probably be told we're making $1.9M each on the contract...

and then the following week $125K

Then the next week $1.1M each..

And then $300K and then so on..

(06-07-2016 02:55 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  I dont think anyone was suggesting (in this thread anyways) to walk away from CUSA.

Just suggesting it was walking away money in the sense that CUSA should have walked away and said no thanks.

Exactly, that's what I meant anyway. I'm not even saying to do it, but it certainly is close to that point when the dollar figure gets this low.

Weren't we told last fall that C-USA hired a firm to negotiate our tv deal? What a bargain.

Paid them at least as much as we're getting...

(06-07-2016 02:54 PM)MTowho Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 02:34 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  MTowho its not all about Money. I mean yes in the end it matters but its about perception and over all disadvantages like recruiting, exposure etc. I bet you 500K is like ~1.5% of ODU athletic expenses but its the other things that bother me. If its just about money and if i were ODU Admin i would invest some money on inhouse digital media and stream everything and tell these media bastards to scram and earn more than that for sure. Right now with horrible streaming our MonarchMedia makes about 70k an year and i bet i can more than double that if i stream everything off of it and make it better. Anyways this deal stinks

Perception? I think it's pretty clear to everyone paying attention that TV revenue is going to drop for all of us, and we were the unlucky first ones to have to renegotiate. Exposure? We're getting the exposure, just not the money. I have no idea what you are talking about there. Digital Media? Sounds like you have a personal bias with ODU that doesn't really apply to the conference as a whole.

Edit: Recruiting? "Hey Recruit, you can see us play on ESPN, CBS Sports, beIN sports, and ASN" ???

Not sure many members of the conference can say the same about exposure for instance ODU is getting zilch and as far as recruiting is concerned many on this board will beg to differ.

At least this crap TV contract is only a 2 year deal. All the admins in this conference need to focus on building their schools brand as much as possible over the next 2 years. Especially the teams in the larger markets. Maybe the market will have settled down a little more in the next 2 years. We all just happened to catch it on a down turn with all the cord cutting and ESPN putting themselves in a bad spot with over bidding on content. It was smart by CUSA officials to only make this a 2 year deal. Who knows how much ASN or BeIn can grow in the US over the next 2 years. They may have more money to throw around at that point.

(06-07-2016 02:01 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  I love how once a week one of our Newspapers following our conference pulls a number out of their arses and people freak out. I don't think the Virginia Pilot knows what it's talking about any more that the man on the moon. Its all speculation and hyperbole. Now when CUSA announces hard numbers and they are this bad, you have my permission to crap your pants and scream and holler.

Harry Minium has proven time and again that what he writes is accurate and from reliable sources. In this case, the info was obtained from ODU via a FOIA request. I am not wild about what he wrote, but I am confident it is reliable.

Ok here is what looks like took place.

1. Our former Commish knew the haircut was coming when he had to renegotiate after schools left for the AAC. But he had some exit fees which are now gone to stem the tide short term....Then he bolted

2. The MAC took criticism for the long term deal they took a couple years back. Kudos to their commish,they were very smart. This has no refection on which conference pays better football. Its who can negotiate the best deal. Look at whatever career you are in you all know people way less competent that you that get paid more for the same job.

3.The schools that came over from the sun belt still made out better than staying there for virtually no TV money.

4. Why all the strange figures that don't make sense? Our new commish must have hired a new car sales manager as a consultant at the last conference meetings down in Florida. "Teach each of the 14 CUSA schools how to release so many numbers that nobody can really figure out how bad we got hosed. You know the same way you confuse the crap out of a car buyer so he has no idea what he is buying or how many years he is making the monthly payments."

5. Now as far as concession sales at your arenas and stadiums. Just quote gross sales and do not include the price paid from suppliers for the food or the labor to cook and serve the food. Gross numbers look better !

6. It is so amazing that the Privileged 5 keep getting record increases in TV money and the Undervalued 5 set records the opposite way.

(06-07-2016 12:40 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 12:36 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 12:34 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  Yeah but is it possible that there was just a misunderstand of the question. Maybe the AD thought he was asking about the old contract?

I never thought anyone straight up lied, but was concerned with this being a new beat writer and all.

OUr guy is not new, he has been at the paper for a year...He quoted
"new CUSA TV Deal" 9 million a few days ago...

Either way Brad responded to me just now on twitter...Here is what he said "I'm told figure of $9 million is total value, which includes productions costs for TV. Other figure is cash given to schools."

That is not clear at all.

Very confusing. The BG article subtitle is "New deal includes 4 networks, $5 million annual revenue decrease." It is written in several places as if $9M is paid to CUSA per year and compares it to the $14M that was paid and distributed by CUSA under the previous deal. Now, it appears as if the $9M includes production costs and is not comparable to the $14M figure. Very confusing wording at best or potentially misleading at worst. What does this mean? Are network cost estimates being rolled into the total? If so, this is the first time I've heard a conference TV deal publicized in such a way. IIRC, the MAC deal includes money for equipment upgrades, but I don't think it's the majority of the contract.

(06-07-2016 02:24 PM)Niner National Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 01:50 PM)wh49er Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 01:41 PM)chidave Wrote:  This, especially if you factor in lower ticket sales for Thurs-Fri games and/or non ideal start times. 200K is very close to being walk away money.

The 200K would be worth telling someone to go F themselves alone.

Good luck recruiting without any TV exposure.

People always seem to miss that by focusing on the money received. The real value is the exposure and always has been Being on any ESPN network is extremely valuable .

(06-07-2016 03:29 PM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 12:40 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 12:36 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 12:34 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  Yeah but is it possible that there was just a misunderstand of the question. Maybe the AD thought he was asking about the old contract?

I never thought anyone straight up lied, but was concerned with this being a new beat writer and all.

OUr guy is not new, he has been at the paper for a year...He quoted
"new CUSA TV Deal" 9 million a few days ago...

Either way Brad responded to me just now on twitter...Here is what he said "I'm told figure of $9 million is total value, which includes productions costs for TV. Other figure is cash given to schools."

That is not clear at all.

Very confusing. The BG article subtitle is "New deal includes 4 networks, $5 million annual revenue decrease." It is written in several places as if $9M is paid to CUSA per year and compares it to the $14M that was paid and distributed by CUSA under the previous deal. Now, it appears as if the $9M includes production costs and is not comparable to the $14M figure. Very confusing wording at best or potentially misleading at worst. What does this mean? Are network cost estimates being rolled into the total? If so, this is the first time I've heard a conference TV deal publicized in such a way. IIRC, the MAC deal includes money for equipment upgrades, but I don't think it's the majority of the contract.

Don't think it's confusing at all. ODU and WKU AD'S sold the move to CUSA as a big plus, including entry fees. Now that the rubber has hit the road these two are spinning the deal to cover their asses.AD's sign contracts as well and most are always looking for the next big gig. It is not a resume builder to say that you presided over the single worst loss of TV money in the history of CUSA.

So ,you start to spin. 9 million a year sounds good in the current tv climate. Except it's not 9 million in profit it 2 million in profit and the 7 million in production costs that the tv networks pick up anyway. Creative financing at its best.

I will say this whoever reached out to Bein from the conference is a smart and savyou person. If Bein had not been invited the money would have been even worse.

Maybe it was $9 million Canadian?

(06-07-2016 02:48 PM)Orange County Owl Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 02:44 PM)Noodles Wrote:  What do we get here other than autobid possibilities?

I think people underestimate how difficult it would be to schedule across all sports in the independent scenario.

That being said ... we feel your pain (although ours is more self-inflicted over the past 50 years or so).

You can put the non-football sports into the WAC and go Indy in football.

A couple of things...
> Cord cutting has definitely hurt TV dollars
> Cord cutting will continue to be the trend (think cell phones and house phones). The younger generation watches more on their phones and tablets than anything else
> Streaming is the future
> TV markets will matter less and less
> For the most part, nobody outside of C-USA fans care to watch any of our teams.
> Honestly, I don't like to watch most C-USA games. I'm hoping this changes as teams and programs develop an identity, and, just as importantly improve their product.
> I'm about ready for FBS to split into 2 divisions. I want Southern Miss to compete for national championships at some level, and on a somewhat level playing field. That is not possible now.

At some point is it even worth it to sign with ESPN?

(06-07-2016 03:46 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  Maybe it was $9 million Canadian?

Pesos, perhaps?

I'm not saying that we should get away from CUSA either, just that $200,000 is not a fair amount for tier 1,2, and 3 broadcast rights coupled with our inability to determine on which days we play and at what time we play. Not being able to chose game times cost us more than $200,000 a year in gate receipts. Noon games costs a minimum of 3,000 in attendance due to conflicts with youth sports, Friday games cost us that due to HS sports.

(06-07-2016 02:23 PM)MTowho Wrote:  Some of you guys need to chill out. I know TV revenue is the sexy thing to talk about, but my god, $500k on a $30-40 million dollar budget is not the end of the world. It's 1-2% of most of our athletic dept budgets.

Sure - we need to talk about other ways of driving revenue, but step away from the cliff.

Honest question...how many I'm the c-USA have a budget around $40 million?