So I had a shower thought on media rights and the G5 (and in particular C-USA). We will undoubtedly be last in line for payouts in the upcoming negotiations, so maybe some creative thinking is in order. I will use NBC as the media partner below, but you could honestly substitute them for any other media outlet. I am using them here because they seem hungry for content for Peacock and have covered less mainstream sports in the past.

Let's dabble in the land of make believe for a moment. C-USA partners with NBC. We get all of our normal games on Peacock, champ game on NBC. Pretty standard stuff. The next part is where the magic happens. We get NBC to setup neutral site matchups against P5 opponents where C-USA is the "home" team that gets the media rights. Ticket sales handled through each programs box office. 50/50 split of walk-ups.

For example, NBC could pay Miami to play FIU at the Dolphins' stadium. It is still basically a home game for Miami, they get a kick-back from NBC for taking the game, NBC gets to broadcast a game with Miami without having to pay big $$$ for the broadcast rights to the entire ACC.

WKU could play Purdue/Indiana in Indianapolis, or UK in Louisville/Nashville, MTSU and UT/Vandy in Nashville, LaTech and LSU in New Orleans, Jacksonville State vs. Auburn in Birmingham, etc. Try to get matchups that have a storyline or some regionality to them.

The caveat is it might cost more to lure these P5 programs into these matchups than NBC is willing to pay. I know WKU has played UK in Nashville before as part of a series and I am sure would give them a game in Lexington if that was required. The same would likely be true of any of these other matchups.

Any thoughts on this type of setup? Do you think it would actually be feasible, or is it all just a pipe dream?

Your best shot is probably Paramount+ (CBS). You've got a relationship already, they've been spending money left and right to get content on their service ($100 million Halo show, Star Trek, etc), and advertised during the Super Bowl.

(06-06-2022 09:40 AM)ODU-Z8 Wrote:  Your best shot is probably Paramount+ (CBS). You've got a relationship already, they've been spending money left and right to get content on their service ($100 million Halo show, Star Trek, etc), and advertised during the Super Bowl.

Yea, any partner with a linear/broadcast network and a streaming platform would fit the bill. The meat of the idea is using that partner to setup neutral site games that they could put on their prime time network. You could theoretically have 9 of those matchups plus a CCG all on a major network and all with C-USA as the rights owner. It would just take some convincing (aka money) to convince the P5 programs to participate. Also, the current owner of the rights of the P5's might not like the idea much.

(06-06-2022 09:35 AM)freshtop Wrote:  The caveat is it might cost more to lure these P5 programs into these matchups than NBC is willing to pay.

This is the problem. It wouldn't be worth it to them.

I had the same thought last season with the whole Peacock thing.. I feel like they streamed a few games but could've done more. They catered to Notre Dame, but they could build on something with a good G5 conference. There are options to have all the games there especially if there are a couple at the same time.

I don't know what anyone else does, but when I'm watching football if it ain't USM, I bounce between games I think may be good/fun to watch.

With TBS as part of the larger DiscoveryWarner grouping venturing back into college football*, combining that with whatever becomes of the HBOMax, Discovery+ combined streaming platform might be a way to go.

*TBS is bidding on part of the Big Ten rights.

I think if you’re going to go all-in on streaming, you might as well stay with ESPN+ because at least you’re on a sports-centric service where you stand a better chance (maybe not great but at least a better chance) at drawing in viewers without skin in the game. Plus more of your fan base is likely to have ESPN+ than Discovery+/Paramount+/Peacock. Wonder how the Peacock numbers look? I know a lot of Norte Dame fans were not happy about the Toledo game being on the ****. But they do seem ahead of the other with integrating sports (English soccer, I think some tennis and auto racing too, and of course WWE).

What’s the deal with ESPN3? Could CUSA work a deal where their games were on both the 3 and the +? Because at least with Xfinity, you can access ESPN3 games through the on-screen sports bug through the remote, so that would potentially alleviate issues about not being on linear TV.

(06-06-2022 06:50 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  I think if you’re going to go all-in on streaming, you might as well stay with ESPN+ because at least you’re on a sports-centric service where you stand a better chance (maybe not great but at least a better chance) at drawing in viewers without skin in the game. Plus more of your fan base is likely to have ESPN+ than Discovery+/Paramount+/Peacock. Wonder how the Peacock numbers look? I know a lot of Norte Dame fans were not happy about the Toledo game being on the ****. But they do seem ahead of the other with integrating sports (English soccer, I think some tennis and auto racing too, and of course WWE).

What’s the deal with ESPN3? Could CUSA work a deal where their games were on both the 3 and the +? Because at least with Xfinity, you can access ESPN3 games through the on-screen sports bug through the remote, so that would potentially alleviate issues about not being on linear TV.

I get Peacock for free through Xfinity (for agreeing to get a free Flex streaming box). If the money is equal I would take Peacock/NBC broadcast over ESPN+/ESPN linear (assuming the CCG is on NBC). I think Peacock might be a little more inclined to promote C-USA content vs. ESPN+ (which is great for dedicated fans, but pretty bad for casual fans to find a game).

I know freshtop is just throwing out ideal but if we fans are talking about such and such streaming services....

I have to believe those people that have their job on the line are in contact with every outlet. The bottom line is someone has to be willing to pay for the content. If the SBC or MAC had made the same decisions that those schools that are no longer in CUSA made. They wouldn't have the contract they have and wouldn't be covered by espn. On the other hand if CUSA had not chosen to tell espn to f' off CUSA would be under that same type of contract.

These small time contracts (dollars) isnt about viewing numbers for espn...its all about content. From what I can see espn owns more content than they can show and that's why they get to sell games they own to CBSSN. That also cut the legs out from under CUSA because its cheaper than what CBSSN had invested into CUSA. The numbers dont really matter because in the in its beans and if its 1lb or 4lb, its still beans.

But until someone can show a comment from an AD or the offices of CUSA saying they did not try to get so and so involved. I'm going to believe someone connected to CUSA has reached out to every service that is streaming or showing college sports.

The only thing that changes that is consistently having schools, yes, SCHOOLS, ranked year after year in football and basketball. Then it might add value because ranked teams playing will draw viewers in high enough numbers to set you apart.

(06-07-2022 01:37 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  I know freshtop is just throwing out ideal but if we fans are talking about such and such streaming services....

I have to believe those people that have their job on the line are in contact with every outlet. The bottom line is someone has to be willing to pay for the content. If the SBC or MAC had made the same decisions that those schools that are no longer in CUSA made. They wouldn't have the contract they have and wouldn't be covered by espn. On the other hand if CUSA had not chosen to tell espn to f' off CUSA would be under that same type of contract.

These small time contracts (dollars) isnt about viewing numbers for espn...its all about content. From what I can see espn owns more content than they can show and that's why they get to sell games they own to CBSSN. That also cut the legs out from under CUSA because its cheaper than what CBSSN had invested into CUSA. The numbers dont really matter because in the in its beans and if its 1lb or 4lb, its still beans.

But until someone can show a comment from an AD or the offices of CUSA saying they did not try to get so and so involved. I'm going to believe someone connected to CUSA has reached out to every service that is streaming or showing college sports.

The only thing that changes that is consistently having schools, yes, SCHOOLS, ranked year after year in football and basketball. Then it might add value because ranked teams playing will draw viewers in high enough numbers to set you apart.

You are correct that this is all just fan conjecture for fun. You are also correct that C-USA is likely exploring all options. My hope is that we weigh exposure vs. payout when it comes to media rights. I don't want to be on Flosports/Facebook for 100k more per year vs. NBC/ESPN/Fox/CBS (or any major streaming site like Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc.).

FloSports would be only streaming platform that wants us. NBC has never wanted college sports besides Notre Dame, long track record there.

Guys, I really feel for you there. All G5 conferences are fighting for limited spotlight and it is hard. C-USA has for the most recent past received a short-end of the stick. It stinks, but is nothing new.
I hope it gets better.

You gotta explore every option, but I just don't see it. The major networks and their streaming platforms and the large streaming only companies (Netflix/Hulu/Amazon) would likely want to build around a marquee property. That's why they're all fighting for jumping in on the B1G deal. If this new unknown CUSA were to get on one of these, it'd be after they already decided that they can compete in live sports and have already locked up a major conference for content. Then they'll add more. But NBC (or insert network here) doesn't really have a reason to do all of what you outlined in trying by pumping in their own money to help CUSA. And the P5 teams would rather do business as usual with the G5 and sign deals that are more favorable to them and likely keep neutral site games just against other P5

(06-07-2022 10:18 AM)space orange Wrote:  You gotta explore every option, but I just don't see it. The major networks and their streaming platforms and the large streaming only companies (Netflix/Hulu/Amazon) would likely want to build around a marquee property. That's why they're all fighting for jumping in on the B1G deal. If this new unknown CUSA were to get on one of these, it'd be after they already decided that they can compete in live sports and have already locked up a major conference for content. Then they'll add more. But NBC (or insert network here) doesn't really have a reason to do all of what you outlined in trying by pumping in their own money to help CUSA. And the P5 teams would rather do business as usual with the G5 and sign deals that are more favorable to them and likely keep neutral site games just against other P5

I agree that it is highly unlikely, but WKU has played neutral site games against P5 Kentucky in the past. Since we won the last two matchups it probably won't be a series that gets renewed any time soon.

The general idea would be that NBC (or other partner) would get the rights to C-USA for cheap (let's say $1 million per team and that number includes production costs). Then they could try and buy neutral site matchups with P5 programs.

Hypothetically a network partner could assist in arranging a series between LSU and LaTech (again, hypothetical). LaTech plays @ LSU (not a buy game). LSU plays in the Superdome against LaTech but LaTech is technically the home team (network pays LSU 1 million to agree). Some P5's are paying almost 2 million for buy games currently. Getting a home game and a favorable neutral site game and extra network money on top seems like a nice windfall for the power conference team
(almost 5 million over saved/earned over 2 games). C-USA teams would lose some money from the guarantee game, but get to play a regional P5 opponent on a major broadcast network. Can C-USA programs afford to lose the buy game revenue? Probably not. Can we survive playing on Facebook or Flosports? I don't think we can long term. We either need improved revenues or greatly improved exposure. I think the later is easier to accomplish short term. There are a lot of streaming and linear services competing for content and ESPN already has the lion's share of College Football locked up for a long time. Streaming services are starting to incorporate sports into their lineups to appeal to a broader audience. I wouldn't put it past one of them to pony up decent money to get what little content is still available. Some streaming services are spending $15 million an episode, you could get two seasons of C-USA content for that and have a full slate of college sports.

I think we’re in a position that we really can’t be choosers. I think we tuck our tails in between our legs and apologize to ESPN. Take no money, have ESPN cover production cost and we have everything on ESPN+ with a couple of games moved to major ESPN channels per year. Contract to have the championship game on ESPN2 and call it a day. Prove our worth for a contract and come around the next time looking for some money.

(06-07-2022 10:38 AM)Ewglenn Wrote:  I think we’re in a position that we really can’t be choosers. I think we tuck our tails in between our legs and apologize to ESPN. Take no money, have ESPN cover production cost and we have everything on ESPN+ with a couple of games moved to major ESPN channels per year. Contract to have the championship game on ESPN2 and call it a day. Prove our worth for a contract and come around the next time looking for some money.

I just don't see it with ESPN. They have every day of the week covered now (Monday Night Football, Tues/Wed MACtion, Thur/Fri FunBelt, Sat P5+AAC+SBC, Sunday NFL roundtable). We would be getting games moved to ESPNU at arbitrary times with no exposure. I would rather partner with a newcomer like AppleTV+ that would be more inclined to promote and showcase conference content.

This may just be crazy enough to work. Well done!

I think the bigger issue for this plan, you'd probably have to pay off both ESPN and the P5 school each time. ESPN for the rights and the P5 will only agree if they get a payday too, because they're inconveniencing their fans and will catch flak. I'm sure that wont be cheap

(06-07-2022 10:53 AM)ODU-Z8 Wrote:  I think the bigger issue for this plan, you'd probably have to pay off both ESPN and the P5 school each time. ESPN for the rights and the P5 will only agree if they get a payday too, because they're inconveniencing their fans and will catch flak. I'm sure that wont be cheap

ESPN (or whoever the normal rights holder is for the opponent) would certainly not be pleased, but the rights go to the home team. If C-USA were listed as such (WKU was the home team in our Nashville games against UK and UofL) then ESPN would just have to suck it up. For a program like LSU, a "neutral" game in New Orleans is just another home game in reality. It is just one they get to sell tickets to outside their season package. Getting essentially 2 buy games for $0 plus a little network money on top might make it appealing enough to try. It wouldn't be an every year type of game, but if you can get 1-2 contests a season conference wide on a 5 year rotation then you would have the media rights to games in major markets, with P5 opponents, and a "David vs. Goliath" story line to pitch. Makes for easy TV ratings in my opinion, also makes for great fan experiences in cities where ideally both programs would have sizeable alumni bases. WKU vs. UK in Nashville in 2013 (our last game played against them) had 46,723 in attendance.

(06-07-2022 10:42 AM)freshtop Wrote:  

(06-07-2022 10:38 AM)Ewglenn Wrote:  I think we’re in a position that we really can’t be choosers. I think we tuck our tails in between our legs and apologize to ESPN. Take no money, have ESPN cover production cost and we have everything on ESPN+ with a couple of games moved to major ESPN channels per year. Contract to have the championship game on ESPN2 and call it a day. Prove our worth for a contract and come around the next time looking for some money.

I just don't see it with ESPN. They have every day of the week covered now (Monday Night Football, Tues/Wed MACtion, Thur/Fri FunBelt, Sat P5+AAC+SBC, Sunday NFL roundtable). We would be getting games moved to ESPNU at arbitrary times with no exposure. I would rather partner with a newcomer like AppleTV+ that would be more inclined to promote and showcase conference content.

One of the Liberty fans mentioned that their AD had connections and was a good negotiator that's how they got their ESPN deal. If ESPN isn't interested in CUSA, maybe that guy can strike a deal. I think you're on the right path with Peacock or someone said Paramount + if those are looking to get into college football.

Test the waters with a G5 conference or two and if they see there's a market, then they can try to roll in a P5 (think CUSA and PAC 12 probably not but bear with me). The CUSA games could be the early games and bout time some are wrapping would be when the west coast games start.