(10-16-2016 04:33 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:26 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:17 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 02:47 AM)Savacool Wrote:  Did you mean Boise State? We do not want them in the AAC in my humble opinion. Their program has gone downhill fast. I cannot watch a game on a blue playing field! Bring on BYU,Army,Air Force or even Colorado State.

Yeah bsu has gone downhill lol. They turned down this conference because of TooLame taking sdsu with them. Umass, niu etc will be the pool of teams added to the AAC if anyone. It's a shame the AAC couldn't add any more mwc teams and settled on more cusa schools. It killed the perception of a best of the rest conference.

No, it didn't; every talking head on TV agrees that the AAC is the best G5 conference. We already have a scheduling agreement with BYU and if Aresco can get a network to guarantee, let's say 10 million, if two of the four aforementioned schools come aboard, it could happen.

You think a scheduling agreement with byu is special lol. Byu is a de facto member of the mwc with how many games they play against mwc. And how did bsu get the access bowl out in 2014? Why are the tv deals so similar? The mwc has been the best G5 leage for so long it's nice to have some competition. This leage ain't getting 10 million a year or 5. Why would they?

You're freaking nutso, if you think the MWC is better than the AAC team for team. All you have is Boise and Air Force, that's it (and occasionally SDSU); we normally have 5 decent teams in football and basketball every year.

(10-16-2016 04:39 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:33 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:26 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:17 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 02:47 AM)Savacool Wrote:  Did you mean Boise State? We do not want them in the AAC in my humble opinion. Their program has gone downhill fast. I cannot watch a game on a blue playing field! Bring on BYU,Army,Air Force or even Colorado State.

Yeah bsu has gone downhill lol. They turned down this conference because of TooLame taking sdsu with them. Umass, niu etc will be the pool of teams added to the AAC if anyone. It's a shame the AAC couldn't add any more mwc teams and settled on more cusa schools. It killed the perception of a best of the rest conference.

No, it didn't; every talking head on TV agrees that the AAC is the best G5 conference. We already have a scheduling agreement with BYU and if Aresco can get a network to guarantee, let's say 10 million, if two of the four aforementioned schools come aboard, it could happen.

You think a scheduling agreement with byu is special lol. Byu is a de facto member of the mwc with how many games they play against mwc. And how did bsu get the access bowl out in 2014? Why are the tv deals so similar? The mwc has been the best G5 leage for so long it's nice to have some competition. This leage ain't getting 10 million a year or 5. Why would they?

You're freaking nutso, if you think the MWC is better than the AAC team for team. All you have is Boise and Air Force, that's it (and occasionally SDSU); we normally have 4 to 5 decent teams in football and basketball.

I think they are pretty equal year to year. You guys are the ones making these predictions after 2 years.

You think a scheduling agreement with byu is special lol. Byu is a de facto member of the mwc with how many games they play against mwc. And how did bsu get the access bowl out in 2014? Why are the tv deals so similar? The mwc has been the best G5 leage for so long it's nice to have some competition. This leage ain't getting 10 million a year or 5. Why would they?
[/quote]





Check the facts! BYU plays the PAC more than the MWC except for next year. We don't consider ourselves defacto members of the PAC. With a scheduling agreement ala ND w/ACC I would, but don't see that coming. We have long term agreements with Utah St and BSU from the MWC. We played 3 PAC games to start this season 2 MWC coming up. After next year 3 or 4 per year against the Pac. Do the math.

They schedule us to help sell tickets. Lots of for and against BYU.

The AAC is superior overall to the MWC on the field and butts in the seats. The butts in the seats part still has lots of room to improve in both but especially in the MWC.

(10-16-2016 06:04 PM)Bluecoug Wrote:  You think a scheduling agreement with byu is special lol. Byu is a de facto member of the mwc with how many games they play against mwc. And how did bsu get the access bowl out in 2014? Why are the tv deals so similar? The mwc has been the best G5 leage for so long it's nice to have some competition. This leage ain't getting 10 million a year or 5. Why would they?

Check the facts! BYU plays the PAC more than the MWC except for next year. We don't consider ourselves defacto members of the PAC. With a scheduling agreement ala ND w/ACC I would, but don't see that coming. We have long term agreements with Utah St and BSU from the MWC. We played 3 PAC games to start this season 2 MWC coming up. After next year 3 or 4 per year against the Pac. Do the math.

They schedule us to help sell tickets. Lots of for and against BYU.

The AAC is superior overall to the MWC on the field and butts in the seats. The butts in the seats part still has lots of room to improve in both but especially in the MWC.
[/quote]

So why are you guys only playing 1 AAC team this year? And you are playing Fresno, San Ho, and Hawaii next year in addition to bsu and usu. Where are all the AAC teams? Just ECU? 2018 you have usu, bsu, and Hawaii. Where are all the AAC teams? Personally I would rather not play byu but bsu signed a 20 year deal with them so it will be every year. Will be a great game this Thursday at bronco stadium with the Cotten bowl up for grabs. What are byu's prospects for bowls?

The biggest fallacy I see in these posts is that the AAC has a substantially better TV contract. The numbers show that they are similar. In Boise's case, it is actually better in the MW.

(10-16-2016 07:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  The biggest fallacy I see in these posts is that the AAC has a substantially better TV contract. The numbers show that they are similar. In Boise's case, it is actually better in the MW.

Says the guy whose school received zero bonus money the year BSU won a NY6 bowl.

(10-16-2016 04:23 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:09 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:22 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 02:42 AM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 02:36 AM)fishpro1098 Wrote:  The Big 12 isn't going to do anything, because the money is not materializing; this is exactly why Aresco needs to add 2 teams that bring value before the contract renegotiation, otherwise we will end up with a reduced TV contract like CUSA. If you think being an ostrich and burying your head in the sand like the Big 12 is a good move (rather than being proactive), say hello to the Dodo for me.

You can wish all you want, none of those teams have a compelling reason to leave their existing situations. The money is not there.


.

Actually, BYU doesn't get that much for their home games and they have no shot at an access bowl, outside of going undefeated and making the playoff (fat chance). Additionally, the MWC TV contract is worth less than the AAC's and offers way less coverage.


You're wrong on both accounts but you do what makes you feel good.

I'm actually right about both, moron; the American's contract is worth $2.5 million a year, while the MW is worth $1.64 million. http://www.mwcconnection.com/mountain-we...er-schools

Does that include the bonus money distributed by boise's ESPN deal? For instance Wyoming got around 1 million in bonus money the last 2 years for a total of over 2.5 a year the AAC makes.

Did you know UConn pulled in 10 million dollars total with bonus money from football and bball units two years ago and SDSU/Air Force/UNLV pulled no bonus money at all?

(10-16-2016 07:16 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:23 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:09 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:22 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 02:42 AM)acc4life Wrote:  You can wish all you want, none of those teams have a compelling reason to leave their existing situations. The money is not there.


.

Actually, BYU doesn't get that much for their home games and they have no shot at an access bowl, outside of going undefeated and making the playoff (fat chance). Additionally, the MWC TV contract is worth less than the AAC's and offers way less coverage.


You're wrong on both accounts but you do what makes you feel good.

I'm actually right about both, moron; the American's contract is worth $2.5 million a year, while the MW is worth $1.64 million. http://www.mwcconnection.com/mountain-we...er-schools

Does that include the bonus money distributed by boise's ESPN deal? For instance Wyoming got around 1 million in bonus money the last 2 years for a total of over 2.5 a year the AAC makes.

Did you know UConn pulled in 10 million dollars total with bonus money from football and bball units two years ago and SDSU/Air Force/UNLV pulled no bonus money at all?

Uconn should be in the p5 with their basketball. Their women's team is especially amazing. I reckon they would pull that much $ regardless of conference affiliation. I didn't include basketball credits as I thought we were talking about the football contract.

(10-16-2016 04:35 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:23 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:09 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:22 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 02:42 AM)acc4life Wrote:  You can wish all you want, none of those teams have a compelling reason to leave their existing situations. The money is not there.


.

Actually, BYU doesn't get that much for their home games and they have no shot at an access bowl, outside of going undefeated and making the playoff (fat chance). Additionally, the MWC TV contract is worth less than the AAC's and offers way less coverage.


You're wrong on both accounts but you do what makes you feel good.

I'm actually right about both, moron; the American's contract is worth $2.5 million a year, while the MW is worth $1.64 million. http://www.mwcconnection.com/mountain-we...er-schools

Does that include the bonus money distributed by boise's ESPN deal? For instance Wyoming got around 1 million in bonus money the last 2 years for a total of over 2.5 a year the AAC makes.

No, it doesn't, but some teams in the MWC only got 300k in bonus money; so yes, when Boise wins a NY6 bowl, of course they will make more than the average AAC team, because of the uneven distribution. However, when an AAC team wins the NY6, it's distributed evenly and all AAC teams come out ahead of MWC teams; add in the NCAA tournament BBall units and the AAC kicks the MWC monetarily year in, year out.

(10-16-2016 09:35 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:35 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:23 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 04:09 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:22 AM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  Actually, BYU doesn't get that much for their home games and they have no shot at an access bowl, outside of going undefeated and making the playoff (fat chance). Additionally, the MWC TV contract is worth less than the AAC's and offers way less coverage.


You're wrong on both accounts but you do what makes you feel good.

I'm actually right about both, moron; the American's contract is worth $2.5 million a year, while the MW is worth $1.64 million. http://www.mwcconnection.com/mountain-we...er-schools

Does that include the bonus money distributed by boise's ESPN deal? For instance Wyoming got around 1 million in bonus money the last 2 years for a total of over 2.5 a year the AAC makes.

No, it doesn't, but some teams in the MWC only got 300k in bonus money; so yes, when Boise wins a NY6 bowl, of course they will make more than the average AAC team, because of the uneven distribution. However, when an AAC team wins the NY6, it's distributed evenly and all AAC teams come out ahead of MWC teams; add in the NCAA tournament BBall units and the AAC kicks the MWC monetarily year in, year out.

Bama =

(10-16-2016 07:12 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  The biggest fallacy I see in these posts is that the AAC has a substantially better TV contract. The numbers show that they are similar. In Boise's case, it is actually better in the MW.

Says the guy whose school received zero bonus money the year BSU won a NY6 bowl.

And that makes my statement false in what way exactly?

(10-16-2016 10:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:12 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  The biggest fallacy I see in these posts is that the AAC has a substantially better TV contract. The numbers show that they are similar. In Boise's case, it is actually better in the MW.

Says the guy whose school received zero bonus money the year BSU won a NY6 bowl.

And that makes my statement false in what way exactly?

It's a better TV contract in terms of the even monetary distribution and equal TV appearances; how is BSU pulling in 2 million in bonus money (while UNLV, SDSU, etc. receive absolutely nothing) a good deal for anyone in the MWC that is not BSU?

(10-16-2016 11:14 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 10:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:12 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  The biggest fallacy I see in these posts is that the AAC has a substantially better TV contract. The numbers show that they are similar. In Boise's case, it is actually better in the MW.

Says the guy whose school received zero bonus money the year BSU won a NY6 bowl.

And that makes my statement false in what way exactly?

It's a better TV contract in terms of the even monetary distribution and equal TV appearances; how is BSU pulling in 2 million in bonus money (while UNLV, SDSU, etc. receive absolutely nothing) a good deal for anyone in the MWC that is not BSU?

And navy makes more than any AAC team because of their own tv deal and likely will when the next contract comes out. Oh and bsu got 1.6 in bonus $ in 2015 not 2 million.

"Basically our deal with the big east stated Under no circumstances will navy lose ground in revenue or exposure"

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/I...Navy.aspx?

(10-17-2016 12:27 AM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 11:14 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 10:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:12 PM)acc4life Wrote:  

(10-16-2016 07:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  The biggest fallacy I see in these posts is that the AAC has a substantially better TV contract. The numbers show that they are similar. In Boise's case, it is actually better in the MW.

Says the guy whose school received zero bonus money the year BSU won a NY6 bowl.

And that makes my statement false in what way exactly?

It's a better TV contract in terms of the even monetary distribution and equal TV appearances; how is BSU pulling in 2 million in bonus money (while UNLV, SDSU, etc. receive absolutely nothing) a good deal for anyone in the MWC that is not BSU?

Oh and bsu got 1.6 in bonus $ in 2015 not 2 million.

Dude, you are a fricking trip; here you are arguing semantics and trying to correct me, when the source link you posted earlier, says 2.1 million in bonus money! smh/lol


http://www.mwcconnection.com/mountain-we...er-schools