In the event that the AAC needs to back-fill, a lot of who those candidates will end up being will be the result of who (from the AAC) gets a call-up. If, for example, USF and UCF get snatched by the Big 12 (or whatever it will end up being), Florida is simply too important a region to write off completely for the American. FAU and FIU have made progressions over the years with their football programs and athletic budgets, and would seriously warrant a look. Conversely, if UConn ends up getting a call, the Northeast is by no means a hot-bed for recruiting talent and exposure for football where UMass absolutely needs to get a call. If UConn moves on, the American would actually be in a solid position because they can be selective and take the best fit moving forward. Now, whether that means it's a UTSA, a UAB, a Southern Mississippi, a Toledo, an NIU, etc. is anyone's guess.

It depends on what the networks (ESPN would want, and what the Presidents would want).

Personally, I think VCU (non-football) and Army (football-only) are natural geographic, institutional and athletic program fits that add valuable content and competitive teams to the current slate of the American.

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 02:39 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The OP might have been better off waiting until after the AAC's new media deal gets announced. ESPN is looking to fill their new ESPN+ streaming service. I would be shocked if the AAC didn't end up with quite a few games relegated to the "+". Sure they will probably still earn a bit more then the rest of the G5, but not enough to make it the buyouts worth it.

The AAC is the only G5 conference that is reliably placing 10-20 games a season into the million+ viewer category. Some of those more well watched games were as high as the 2+ to 3+ million viewer level. I just dont see the AAC becoming a conference housed primarily on ESPN+ in the next deal. I also think there will be multiple interested parties when the bidding starts (far more than there were in the ill fated 2013 negotiations).

That said, I actually do believe ESPN+ will be part of the next AAC TV deal---but I also expect the AAC content moving to ESPN+ will amount to essentially the same AAC content that currently resides on ESPN3. I dont think there will be any appreciable change to the AAC's linear broadcasts vs streaming broadcast percentages in terms of the AAC's current broadcast profile. The AAC may end up with more stuff on ESPN+ than is currently on ESPN3---but it will be because the added content is currently either not broadcast now or is only available on the AAC Digital Network. From where Im sitting, things are lining up very well for the next AAC deal. In the most recent G5 deals----we have seen both the Sunbelt and CUSA increase their exposure/visibility while each more than doubled their payouts. Neither has accomplished as much as the AAC since 2013. Seems to me that successful new deals by the Sunbelt and CUSA would bode well for the AAC when their deal comes up for renewal.

By the way---I dont think the AAC is adding anyone anytime soon---regardless of whether they get 200K a team or 15 million a team in the next deal. I think things are going to remain pretty stable until 2023 or so when the P5 deals are about to renew.

Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

I think you are right. ESPN is looking to shift a larger portion of their revenue streams over to ESPN+, where they don't have to haggle with satellite and cable providers over fees, and can keep all the profits. Pushing more AAC conference games over to the streaming service will increase content for the site. If it happens, the move would certainly hurt the AAC's image of themselves.

(06-10-2018 11:14 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  In the event that the AAC needs to back-fill, a lot of who those candidates will end up being will be the result of who (from the AAC) gets a call-up. If, for example, USF and UCF get snatched by the Big 12 (or whatever it will end up being), Florida is simply too important a region to write off completely for the American. FAU and FIU have made progressions over the years with their football programs and athletic budgets, and would seriously warrant a look. Conversely, if UConn ends up getting a call, the Northeast is by no means a hot-bed for recruiting talent and exposure for football where UMass absolutely needs to get a call. If UConn moves on, the American would actually be in a solid position because they can be selective and take the best fit moving forward. Now, whether that means it's a UTSA, a UAB, a Southern Mississippi, a Toledo, an NIU, etc. is anyone's guess.

It depends on what the networks (ESPN would want, and what the Presidents would want).

Personally, I think VCU (non-football) and Army (football-only) are natural geographic, institutional and athletic program fits that add valuable content and competitive teams to the current slate of the American.

It will be interesting to see where FAU and FIU can take their programs. They both have nice facilities but they have historically struggled to attract fans despite both schools have at least brief stints on on field success.

VCU is another program whose trajectory could take a few different courses. They lack football but they share some history with a few of the AAC schools. If they ever decided to add football they might be able to work themselves back into their conference. For now they seem committed to a basketball identity in the A-10 but who knows if the A-10 will continue to be a multi-bid league.

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 02:39 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The OP might have been better off waiting until after the AAC's new media deal gets announced. ESPN is looking to fill their new ESPN+ streaming service. I would be shocked if the AAC didn't end up with quite a few games relegated to the "+". Sure they will probably still earn a bit more then the rest of the G5, but not enough to make it the buyouts worth it.

The AAC is the only G5 conference that is reliably placing 10-20 games a season into the million+ viewer category. Some of those more well watched games were as high as the 2+ to 3+ million viewer level. I just dont see the AAC becoming a conference housed primarily on ESPN+ in the next deal. I also think there will be multiple interested parties when the bidding starts (far more than there were in the ill fated 2013 negotiations).

That said, I actually do believe ESPN+ will be part of the next AAC TV deal---but I also expect the AAC content moving to ESPN+ will amount to essentially the same AAC content that currently resides on ESPN3. I dont think there will be any appreciable change to the AAC's linear broadcasts vs streaming broadcast percentages in terms of the AAC's current broadcast profile. The AAC may end up with more stuff on ESPN+ than is currently on ESPN3---but it will be because the added content is currently either not broadcast now or is only available on the AAC Digital Network. From where Im sitting, things are lining up very well for the next AAC deal. In the most recent G5 deals----we have seen both the Sunbelt and CUSA increase their exposure/visibility while each more than doubled their payouts. Neither has accomplished as much as the AAC since 2013. Seems to me that successful new deals by the Sunbelt and CUSA would bode well for the AAC when their deal comes up for renewal.

By the way---I dont think the AAC is adding anyone anytime soon---regardless of whether they get 200K a team or 15 million a team in the next deal. I think things are going to remain pretty stable until 2023 or so when the P5 deals are about to renew.

Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

Here is the thing--Im not one who believes cable is going away. Cable has not even really reacted to the threat. Thats because the "streaming threat" has only stolen about 10% of their subscribers since it began. As that threat erodes more audience, Cable will ultimately change--it will react---a la carte will likely be part of it. So---my feeling is BOTH ESPN linear and ESPN-Plus will be a huge part of their future.

Look---Im not anti ESPN-Plus at all. Ive been quite supportive of the platform and actually hope the AAC has SOME presence on it (similar to our ESPN3 presence). I just know that---right now---cable is still dominant. So, I'd want the AAC to have as much content on cable as possible---but I fully expect this will be another 6 year deal. So----we are only looking 6 years into the future. I doubt there will be any huge sea change in 6 years.

(06-10-2018 01:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 02:39 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The OP might have been better off waiting until after the AAC's new media deal gets announced. ESPN is looking to fill their new ESPN+ streaming service. I would be shocked if the AAC didn't end up with quite a few games relegated to the "+". Sure they will probably still earn a bit more then the rest of the G5, but not enough to make it the buyouts worth it.

The AAC is the only G5 conference that is reliably placing 10-20 games a season into the million+ viewer category. Some of those more well watched games were as high as the 2+ to 3+ million viewer level. I just dont see the AAC becoming a conference housed primarily on ESPN+ in the next deal. I also think there will be multiple interested parties when the bidding starts (far more than there were in the ill fated 2013 negotiations).

That said, I actually do believe ESPN+ will be part of the next AAC TV deal---but I also expect the AAC content moving to ESPN+ will amount to essentially the same AAC content that currently resides on ESPN3. I dont think there will be any appreciable change to the AAC's linear broadcasts vs streaming broadcast percentages in terms of the AAC's current broadcast profile. The AAC may end up with more stuff on ESPN+ than is currently on ESPN3---but it will be because the added content is currently either not broadcast now or is only available on the AAC Digital Network. From where Im sitting, things are lining up very well for the next AAC deal. In the most recent G5 deals----we have seen both the Sunbelt and CUSA increase their exposure/visibility while each more than doubled their payouts. Neither has accomplished as much as the AAC since 2013. Seems to me that successful new deals by the Sunbelt and CUSA would bode well for the AAC when their deal comes up for renewal.

By the way---I dont think the AAC is adding anyone anytime soon---regardless of whether they get 200K a team or 15 million a team in the next deal. I think things are going to remain pretty stable until 2023 or so when the P5 deals are about to renew.

Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

I think you are right. ESPN is looking to shift a larger portion of their revenue streams over to ESPN+, where they don't have to haggle with satellite and cable providers over fees, and can keep all the profits. Pushing more AAC conference games over to the streaming service will increase content for the site. If it happens, the move would certainly hurt the AAC's image of themselves.

If you are correct, then it wont happen for the exact reason you mentioned. Its the AAC's content---not ESPN's. If the AAC see's ESPN PLus as a negative and the ESPN bid is super heavy on ESPN-Plus broadcast slots---the AAC will be going largely with other options. Look, the only way the AAC ends up with ESPN-Plus as their primary carrier is if nobody else bids. Zero chance that happens.

(06-10-2018 01:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 01:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 02:39 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The OP might have been better off waiting until after the AAC's new media deal gets announced. ESPN is looking to fill their new ESPN+ streaming service. I would be shocked if the AAC didn't end up with quite a few games relegated to the "+". Sure they will probably still earn a bit more then the rest of the G5, but not enough to make it the buyouts worth it.

The AAC is the only G5 conference that is reliably placing 10-20 games a season into the million+ viewer category. Some of those more well watched games were as high as the 2+ to 3+ million viewer level. I just dont see the AAC becoming a conference housed primarily on ESPN+ in the next deal. I also think there will be multiple interested parties when the bidding starts (far more than there were in the ill fated 2013 negotiations).

That said, I actually do believe ESPN+ will be part of the next AAC TV deal---but I also expect the AAC content moving to ESPN+ will amount to essentially the same AAC content that currently resides on ESPN3. I dont think there will be any appreciable change to the AAC's linear broadcasts vs streaming broadcast percentages in terms of the AAC's current broadcast profile. The AAC may end up with more stuff on ESPN+ than is currently on ESPN3---but it will be because the added content is currently either not broadcast now or is only available on the AAC Digital Network. From where Im sitting, things are lining up very well for the next AAC deal. In the most recent G5 deals----we have seen both the Sunbelt and CUSA increase their exposure/visibility while each more than doubled their payouts. Neither has accomplished as much as the AAC since 2013. Seems to me that successful new deals by the Sunbelt and CUSA would bode well for the AAC when their deal comes up for renewal.

By the way---I dont think the AAC is adding anyone anytime soon---regardless of whether they get 200K a team or 15 million a team in the next deal. I think things are going to remain pretty stable until 2023 or so when the P5 deals are about to renew.

Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

I think you are right. ESPN is looking to shift a larger portion of their revenue streams over to ESPN+, where they don't have to haggle with satellite and cable providers over fees, and can keep all the profits. Pushing more AAC conference games over to the streaming service will increase content for the site. If it happens, the move would certainly hurt the AAC's image of themselves.

If you are correct, then it wont happen for the exact reason you mentioned. Its the AAC's content---not ESPN's. If the AAC see's ESPN PLus as a negative and the ESPN bid is super heavy on ESPN-Plus broadcast slots---the AAC will be going largely with other options. Look, the only way the AAC ends up with ESPN-Plus as their primary carrier is if nobody else bids. Zero chance that happens.

I believe the AAC has some quality OOC games in their future schedule that ESPN will certainly want to air on their channels. But, I could see ESPN wanting to place the majority of the AAC's conference games on ESPN+.

I think you believe there are more options out there then there really is. If the AAC isn't happy with the majority of their conference games on ESPN+, then they will have to take the scraps CBS Sports or beIN are willing to pay. NBC Sports has yet to show any interest in FBS college football. Fox is not looking to add content either. Is there some mystery bidder no other conference has noticed? Remember, the MWC is looking to renew their deal too. That will reduce your leverage too.

(06-10-2018 02:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 01:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 01:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The AAC is the only G5 conference that is reliably placing 10-20 games a season into the million+ viewer category. Some of those more well watched games were as high as the 2+ to 3+ million viewer level. I just dont see the AAC becoming a conference housed primarily on ESPN+ in the next deal. I also think there will be multiple interested parties when the bidding starts (far more than there were in the ill fated 2013 negotiations).

That said, I actually do believe ESPN+ will be part of the next AAC TV deal---but I also expect the AAC content moving to ESPN+ will amount to essentially the same AAC content that currently resides on ESPN3. I dont think there will be any appreciable change to the AAC's linear broadcasts vs streaming broadcast percentages in terms of the AAC's current broadcast profile. The AAC may end up with more stuff on ESPN+ than is currently on ESPN3---but it will be because the added content is currently either not broadcast now or is only available on the AAC Digital Network. From where Im sitting, things are lining up very well for the next AAC deal. In the most recent G5 deals----we have seen both the Sunbelt and CUSA increase their exposure/visibility while each more than doubled their payouts. Neither has accomplished as much as the AAC since 2013. Seems to me that successful new deals by the Sunbelt and CUSA would bode well for the AAC when their deal comes up for renewal.

By the way---I dont think the AAC is adding anyone anytime soon---regardless of whether they get 200K a team or 15 million a team in the next deal. I think things are going to remain pretty stable until 2023 or so when the P5 deals are about to renew.

Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

I think you are right. ESPN is looking to shift a larger portion of their revenue streams over to ESPN+, where they don't have to haggle with satellite and cable providers over fees, and can keep all the profits. Pushing more AAC conference games over to the streaming service will increase content for the site. If it happens, the move would certainly hurt the AAC's image of themselves.

If you are correct, then it wont happen for the exact reason you mentioned. Its the AAC's content---not ESPN's. If the AAC see's ESPN PLus as a negative and the ESPN bid is super heavy on ESPN-Plus broadcast slots---the AAC will be going largely with other options. Look, the only way the AAC ends up with ESPN-Plus as their primary carrier is if nobody else bids. Zero chance that happens.

I believe the AAC has some quality OOC games in their future schedule that ESPN will certainly want to air on their channels. But, I could see ESPN wanting to place the majority of the AAC's conference games on ESPN+.

I think you believe there are more options out there then there really is. If the AAC isn't happy with the majority of their conference games on ESPN+, then they will have to take the scraps CBS Sports or beIN are willing to pay. NBC Sports has yet to show any interest in FBS college football. Fox is not looking to add content either. Is there some mystery bidder no other conference has noticed? Remember, the MWC is looking to renew their deal too. That will reduce your leverage too.

The MW ratings are lower and the MW has made it clear they want to reduce the number of late slot games they play. In contrast, the AAC has been very flexible and has been willing to play anywhere/anytime. The AAC also has done a good job of scheduling attractive OOC P5 games. That said, despite the negative Nelly narrative, about half the conferences "million+ viewer games" are actually in conference games (ie---AAC vs AAC affairs).

You also eliminate NBC as "not showing any interest in FBS football"---but the fact is, thats not true. They bid aggressively for the Pac-12 and they bid on the AAC when it was a completely unproven product last time around. NBC recently let the Ivy league contract lapse. Seems to me, after seeing how well the AAC has performed, NBC is setting themselves up to make another run on the AAC. We already know CBC-Sports is interested. The FANG type companies are also possibilities (Google, Amazon, Twitter, etc). Aresco has been talking an awfuly big game recently---I think he knows there are enough suitors lining up to generate a much improved deal.

Look, both the Sunbelt and CUSA more than doubled their payout while INCREASING linear coverage this negotiating cycle. Given the AAC performance over the last 5 years---I see no reason to believe the AAC linear exposure will plummet and their payout will drop to CUSA levels as part of the next deal. My guess is exposure improves slightly and the contract value triples or better.

(06-07-2018 06:06 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  It would be nice if the conferences go by regions.

Northwest (Oregon, Alaska, Idaho, Washington, British Columbia and northern Nevada)
Southwest (California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona, southern Utah region)
Southplains (New Mexico, southern Colorado, Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, southern Missouri, southern Kansas)
Northern Plains (Northern Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska)
Gulf Coast
Midwest
Southeast
MidAtlantic
Northeast

More fantasy world.

(06-10-2018 02:27 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 02:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 01:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 01:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

I think you are right. ESPN is looking to shift a larger portion of their revenue streams over to ESPN+, where they don't have to haggle with satellite and cable providers over fees, and can keep all the profits. Pushing more AAC conference games over to the streaming service will increase content for the site. If it happens, the move would certainly hurt the AAC's image of themselves.

If you are correct, then it wont happen for the exact reason you mentioned. Its the AAC's content---not ESPN's. If the AAC see's ESPN PLus as a negative and the ESPN bid is super heavy on ESPN-Plus broadcast slots---the AAC will be going largely with other options. Look, the only way the AAC ends up with ESPN-Plus as their primary carrier is if nobody else bids. Zero chance that happens.

I believe the AAC has some quality OOC games in their future schedule that ESPN will certainly want to air on their channels. But, I could see ESPN wanting to place the majority of the AAC's conference games on ESPN+.

I think you believe there are more options out there then there really is. If the AAC isn't happy with the majority of their conference games on ESPN+, then they will have to take the scraps CBS Sports or beIN are willing to pay. NBC Sports has yet to show any interest in FBS college football. Fox is not looking to add content either. Is there some mystery bidder no other conference has noticed? Remember, the MWC is looking to renew their deal too. That will reduce your leverage too.

The MW ratings are lower and the MW has made it clear they want to reduce the number of late slot games they play. In contrast, the AAC has been very flexible and has been willing to play anywhere/anytime. The AAC also has done a good job of scheduling attractive OOC P5 games. That said, despite the negative Nelly narrative, about half the conferences "million+ viewer games" are actually in conference games (ie---AAC vs AAC affairs).

You also eliminate NBC as "not showing any interest in FBS football"---but the fact is, thats not true. They bid aggressively for the Pac-12 and they bid on the AAC when it was a completely unproven product last time around. NBC recently let the Ivy league contract lapse. Seems to me, after seeing how well the AAC has performed, NBC is setting themselves up to make another run on the AAC. We already know CBC-Sports is interested. The FANG type companies are also possibilities (Google, Amazon, Twitter, etc). Aresco has been talking an awfuly big game recently---I think he knows there are enough suitors lining up to generate a much improved deal.

Look, both the Sunbelt and CUSA both more than doubled their payout while INCREASING linear coverage this negotiating cycle. Given the AAC performance over the last 5 years---I see no reason to believe the AAC linear exposure will plummet and their payout will drop to CUSA levels as part of the next deal. My guess is exposure improves slightly and the contract value triples or better.

You may be right. We will see how things unfold. I will say, I admire the way Houston has built their program over the last decade, and I look forward to our home and home series in 2019 and 2020. North Texas has more than doubled our athletic budget over the past 10 years, and should continue to do so. As two of the largest non-power conference programs in Texas, I think it would be smart to extend the series, if Houston remains in the AAC, and our two games are competitive.

(06-10-2018 01:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 11:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2018 02:39 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The OP might have been better off waiting until after the AAC's new media deal gets announced. ESPN is looking to fill their new ESPN+ streaming service. I would be shocked if the AAC didn't end up with quite a few games relegated to the "+". Sure they will probably still earn a bit more then the rest of the G5, but not enough to make it the buyouts worth it.

The AAC is the only G5 conference that is reliably placing 10-20 games a season into the million+ viewer category. Some of those more well watched games were as high as the 2+ to 3+ million viewer level. I just dont see the AAC becoming a conference housed primarily on ESPN+ in the next deal. I also think there will be multiple interested parties when the bidding starts (far more than there were in the ill fated 2013 negotiations).

That said, I actually do believe ESPN+ will be part of the next AAC TV deal---but I also expect the AAC content moving to ESPN+ will amount to essentially the same AAC content that currently resides on ESPN3. I dont think there will be any appreciable change to the AAC's linear broadcasts vs streaming broadcast percentages in terms of the AAC's current broadcast profile. The AAC may end up with more stuff on ESPN+ than is currently on ESPN3---but it will be because the added content is currently either not broadcast now or is only available on the AAC Digital Network. From where Im sitting, things are lining up very well for the next AAC deal. In the most recent G5 deals----we have seen both the Sunbelt and CUSA increase their exposure/visibility while each more than doubled their payouts. Neither has accomplished as much as the AAC since 2013. Seems to me that successful new deals by the Sunbelt and CUSA would bode well for the AAC when their deal comes up for renewal.

By the way---I dont think the AAC is adding anyone anytime soon---regardless of whether they get 200K a team or 15 million a team in the next deal. I think things are going to remain pretty stable until 2023 or so when the P5 deals are about to renew.

Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

Here is the thing--Im not one who believes cable is going away. Cable has not even really reacted to the threat. Thats because the "streaming threat" has only stolen about 10% of their subscribers since it began. As that threat erodes more audience, Cable will ultimately change--it will react---a la carte will likely be part of it. So---my feeling is BOTH ESPN linear and ESPN-Plus will be a huge part of their future.

Look---Im not anti ESPN-Plus at all. Ive been quite supportive of the platform and actually hope the AAC has SOME presence on it (similar to our ESPN3 presence). I just know that---right now---cable is still dominant. So, I'd want the AAC to have as much content on cable as possible---but I fully expect this will be another 6 year deal. So----we are only looking 6 years into the future. I doubt there will be any huge sea change in 6 years.

I don't think cable is going away because cable and more importantly satellite is efficient for what it provides. Lot of content across a broad range of choices.

When people talk about what they save vs satellite it is because they choose to take less content or happen to live in a place where they are getting a very large number of good OTA stations.

Replicating the same content would mean subscribing or paying per program more than cable or satellite or with sports choosing to forego content.

Many Americans do not have fast internet and do not have cable available either.

My Dad can't get better than 5mbps unless he buys internet from his cable provider and with the bundle offers, it really doesn't make a lot of sense with how they price to not have at least a small cable package.

My brother lives in a small town where cable went broke and closed up shop when everyone went to satellite. Luckily his small regional phone provider offers OK internet.

I have two co-workers who can't work at home because his only internet option is satellite internet and our system flips out over the latency and closes the connection.

So it will be around for quite some time.

As much as you can say that cable will be around because of the technology limitations executives are focused on the growth revenue.

That makes a 10% skid in cable subscriptions seem like a death knell because all of the investment is shifting toward making steaming economical.

If the AAC loses two schools, then there is a good case to say at 10 unless something like Army or VCU opens up.

People lost their cool about Tulane and Tulsa... ...is there any added value left out there? Will ESPN actually put money behind it?

(06-09-2018 02:39 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  The OP might have been better off waiting until after the AAC's new media deal gets announced. ESPN is looking to fill their new ESPN+ streaming service. I would be shocked if the AAC didn't end up with quite a few games relegated to the "+". Sure they will probably still earn a bit more then the rest of the G5, but not enough to make it the buyouts worth it.

There is the buyouts and there is $3 million dollar coaching salaries in FB and BB necessary to compete at the top level within the AAC.

Very few mid majors want to spend like there is no tomorrow.

(06-10-2018 10:14 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  As much as you can say that cable will be around because of the technology limitations executives are focused on the growth revenue.

That makes a 10% skid in cable subscriptions seem like a death knell because all of the investment is shifting toward making steaming economical.

Cable is a mature industry. Its not really a growth industry at all. That said--any infrastructure that controls the last mile of pipe into a home is always valuable. That cable carries internet service---which is a growth industry.

I may be alone here--but my feeling is streaming and cable are just delivery options. Niether have any inherent value. What attracts subscribers is ultimately the content. Right now, streaming isn't really offering a better product----it just has the advantage simply because of price (because they pay less for content). That price advantage is already changing as content providers seek to get more revenue from the streaming services that are becoming more flush with cash. Additionally, more content providers will be moving their content to their own proprietary sites--making it tougher for the big streamers like Netflix and Amazon to offer consumers "one stop shopping".

Bottom line, most assume cable is going to lose this battle and vanish. I dont think so. I think they will each be competing against one another for your subscription dollars for many years to come.

(06-10-2018 11:27 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:14 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  As much as you can say that cable will be around because of the technology limitations executives are focused on the growth revenue.

That makes a 10% skid in cable subscriptions seem like a death knell because all of the investment is shifting toward making steaming economical.

Cable is a mature industry. Its not really a growth industry at all. That said--any infrastructure that controls the last mile of pipe into a home is always valuable. That cable carries internet service---which is a growth industry.

I may be alone here--but my feelings is streaming and cable are just delivery options. Niether have any inherent value. What attracts subscribers is the ultimately the content. Right now, streaming sint really offering a better product----it just has the advantage simply because of price (because they pay less for content). That price advantage is already changing as content providers seek to get more revenue from the streaming services that are becoming more flush with cash. Additionally, more content providers will be moving their content to their own proprietary sites--making it tougher for the big streamers like Netflix and Amazon to offer consumers "one stop shopping".

Bottom line, most assume cable is going to lose this battle and vanish. I dont think so. I think they will each be competing against one another for your subscription dollars for many years to come.

Content is becoming as valuable as its on-demand value.

-TV series
-Movies

Where do sports fit in? Boxing is one of the sports where it is easy to miss a big fight but want to see it on demand. Even if the results are known it is still interesting to see how the fight played out.

Does anyone care to rewatch a NFL, MLB or NBA game once the score is known and in the books? Those sports have been known for giving you the last score in hope that you'll want to tune into the next one.

Take football for example. Typically one can tell how the game played out by just looking at the final score. If the final score is 17-10 it was a defensive struggle. If it was 45-42 it was a shoot out. If its 42-31 it was competitive but conclusive victory but 42-17 and it was a blow out.

Golf on demand? Is the final round worth checking into just to see how the leaderboard evolved? It might be because the final score isn't a very good indicator of how the round played out.

I just think as TV executives figure out how to work on demand for more properties the shakier legs get for cable. New mobile service technologies like 5G are going to lessen the consumer dependency on traditional ISPs.

Homer pick but wonder if Aresco would consider Army FB+VCU BB and NIU FB+Dayton BB.

NIU (besides Army) is the one candidate who’d probably acquiesce on not bringing hoops over to dilute the league and could find a spot in the Horizon.

Every other candidate is likely all-or-nothing and doesn’t allow AAC to make room for both Dayton & VCU.

In a way, NIU having a zero-value hoops program could put it at an advantage, because it allows AAC to add Dayton/VCU (if both willing) without feeding another mouth.

(06-11-2018 01:01 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 11:27 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:14 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  As much as you can say that cable will be around because of the technology limitations executives are focused on the growth revenue.

That makes a 10% skid in cable subscriptions seem like a death knell because all of the investment is shifting toward making steaming economical.

Cable is a mature industry. Its not really a growth industry at all. That said--any infrastructure that controls the last mile of pipe into a home is always valuable. That cable carries internet service---which is a growth industry.

I may be alone here--but my feelings is streaming and cable are just delivery options. Niether have any inherent value. What attracts subscribers is the ultimately the content. Right now, streaming sint really offering a better product----it just has the advantage simply because of price (because they pay less for content). That price advantage is already changing as content providers seek to get more revenue from the streaming services that are becoming more flush with cash. Additionally, more content providers will be moving their content to their own proprietary sites--making it tougher for the big streamers like Netflix and Amazon to offer consumers "one stop shopping".

Bottom line, most assume cable is going to lose this battle and vanish. I dont think so. I think they will each be competing against one another for your subscription dollars for many years to come.

Content is becoming as valuable as its on-demand value.

-TV series
-Movies

Where do sports fit in? Boxing is one of the sports where it is easy to miss a big fight but want to see it on demand. Even if the results are known it is still interesting to see how the fight played out.

Does anyone care to rewatch a NFL, MLB or NBA game once the score is known and in the books? Those sports have been known for giving you the last score in hope that you'll want to tune into the next one.

Take football for example. Typically one can tell how the game played out by just looking at the final score. If the final score is 17-10 it was a defensive struggle. If it was 45-42 it was a shoot out. If its 42-31 it was competitive but conclusive victory but 42-17 and it was a blow out.

Golf on demand? Is the final round worth checking into just to see how the leaderboard evolved? It might be because the final score isn't a very good indicator of how the round played out.

I just think as TV executives figure out how to work on demand for more properties the shakier legs get for cable. New mobile service technologies like 5G are going to lessen the consumer dependency on traditional ISPs.

I also recall a whole bunch of people and reporters saying that regular stores would be a thing of the past and that all buying & selling would be online. Lo and behold, brick & mortar (aka regular) stores are still with us. Yes, there is a good number of people that buy stuff online, but there is also a number of people who just prefer to do business the old-fashioned way.
Same thing with television & cable. They are going to be around for the more traditional and the not-so-wealthy folks. Has the computer replaced the tv screen? Nope, and I doubt it ever will.

(06-11-2018 01:53 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(06-11-2018 01:01 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 11:27 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:14 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  As much as you can say that cable will be around because of the technology limitations executives are focused on the growth revenue.

That makes a 10% skid in cable subscriptions seem like a death knell because all of the investment is shifting toward making steaming economical.

Cable is a mature industry. Its not really a growth industry at all. That said--any infrastructure that controls the last mile of pipe into a home is always valuable. That cable carries internet service---which is a growth industry.

I may be alone here--but my feelings is streaming and cable are just delivery options. Niether have any inherent value. What attracts subscribers is the ultimately the content. Right now, streaming sint really offering a better product----it just has the advantage simply because of price (because they pay less for content). That price advantage is already changing as content providers seek to get more revenue from the streaming services that are becoming more flush with cash. Additionally, more content providers will be moving their content to their own proprietary sites--making it tougher for the big streamers like Netflix and Amazon to offer consumers "one stop shopping".

Bottom line, most assume cable is going to lose this battle and vanish. I dont think so. I think they will each be competing against one another for your subscription dollars for many years to come.

Content is becoming as valuable as its on-demand value.

-TV series
-Movies

Where do sports fit in? Boxing is one of the sports where it is easy to miss a big fight but want to see it on demand. Even if the results are known it is still interesting to see how the fight played out.

Does anyone care to rewatch a NFL, MLB or NBA game once the score is known and in the books? Those sports have been known for giving you the last score in hope that you'll want to tune into the next one.

Take football for example. Typically one can tell how the game played out by just looking at the final score. If the final score is 17-10 it was a defensive struggle. If it was 45-42 it was a shoot out. If its 42-31 it was competitive but conclusive victory but 42-17 and it was a blow out.

Golf on demand? Is the final round worth checking into just to see how the leaderboard evolved? It might be because the final score isn't a very good indicator of how the round played out.

I just think as TV executives figure out how to work on demand for more properties the shakier legs get for cable. New mobile service technologies like 5G are going to lessen the consumer dependency on traditional ISPs.

I also recall a whole bunch of people and reporters saying that regular stores would be a thing of the past and that all buying & selling would be online. Lo and behold, brick & mortar (aka regular) stores are still with us. Yes, there is a good number of people that buy stuff online, but there is also a number of people who just prefer to do business the old-fashioned way.
Same thing with television & cable. They are going to be around for the more traditional and the not-so-wealthy folks. Has the computer replaced the tv screen? Nope, and I doubt it ever will.

But the smartphone has all but exterminated the flip phone. Flat screens have replaced thick TVs.

Functionality, convenience and price point. Smart TVs getting smarter every year.

(06-10-2018 02:27 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 02:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 01:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 01:13 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(06-10-2018 10:05 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Which is long-term a bigger part of the ESPN future?
ESPN News or ESPN+?

Keep that in mind when you make your guesses about the future of AAC TV

I think you are right. ESPN is looking to shift a larger portion of their revenue streams over to ESPN+, where they don't have to haggle with satellite and cable providers over fees, and can keep all the profits. Pushing more AAC conference games over to the streaming service will increase content for the site. If it happens, the move would certainly hurt the AAC's image of themselves.

If you are correct, then it wont happen for the exact reason you mentioned. Its the AAC's content---not ESPN's. If the AAC see's ESPN PLus as a negative and the ESPN bid is super heavy on ESPN-Plus broadcast slots---the AAC will be going largely with other options. Look, the only way the AAC ends up with ESPN-Plus as their primary carrier is if nobody else bids. Zero chance that happens.

I believe the AAC has some quality OOC games in their future schedule that ESPN will certainly want to air on their channels. But, I could see ESPN wanting to place the majority of the AAC's conference games on ESPN+.

I think you believe there are more options out there then there really is. If the AAC isn't happy with the majority of their conference games on ESPN+, then they will have to take the scraps CBS Sports or beIN are willing to pay. NBC Sports has yet to show any interest in FBS college football. Fox is not looking to add content either. Is there some mystery bidder no other conference has noticed? Remember, the MWC is looking to renew their deal too. That will reduce your leverage too.

The MW ratings are lower and the MW has made it clear they want to reduce the number of late slot games they play. In contrast, the AAC has been very flexible and has been willing to play anywhere/anytime. The AAC also has done a good job of scheduling attractive OOC P5 games. That said, despite the negative Nelly narrative, about half the conferences "million+ viewer games" are actually in conference games (ie---AAC vs AAC affairs).

You also eliminate NBC as "not showing any interest in FBS football"---but the fact is, thats not true. They bid aggressively for the Pac-12 and they bid on the AAC when it was a completely unproven product last time around. NBC recently let the Ivy league contract lapse. Seems to me, after seeing how well the AAC has performed, NBC is setting themselves up to make another run on the AAC. We already know CBC-Sports is interested. The FANG type companies are also possibilities (Google, Amazon, Twitter, etc). Aresco has been talking an awfuly big game recently---I think he knows there are enough suitors lining up to generate a much improved deal.

Look, both the Sunbelt and CUSA more than doubled their payout while INCREASING linear coverage this negotiating cycle. Given the AAC performance over the last 5 years---I see no reason to believe the AAC linear exposure will plummet and their payout will drop to CUSA levels as part of the next deal. My guess is exposure improves slightly and the contract value triples or better.

Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State all have better ratings being featured on ESPN than they have been on the CBSNetwork. We really do not know what the ratings are like because the Neilson ratings do not count that sports channel.

The AAC and MWC won't have to worry about "backfilling" since none of their schools are wanted by any P5 conference. That ship has sailed.