At a certain point though you either have to maximize revenue or minimize costs. I thought the Big East was going to at least mildly succeed in the former, but they have failed. It seems like the basic value of all these schools has been deemed by the market as anywhere from 1-2 million per school. If that's the truth then it really ceases to matter who is in what group anymore. Sure there are schools in there I'd prefer to be with than others, but my preferences are related to who can actually fill their stadiums. That's pretty much none of these schools.

(02-13-2013 12:51 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  At a certain point though you either have to maximize revenue or minimize costs. I thought the Big East was going to at least mildly succeed in the former, but they have failed. It seems like the basic value of all these schools has been deemed by the market as anywhere from 1-2 million per school. If that's the truth then it really ceases to matter who is in what group anymore. Sure there are schools in there I'd prefer to be with than others, but my preferences are related to who can actually fill their stadiums. That's pretty much none of these schools.

I don't think you take an either/or approach if you do it right. Max revenue is what drives the Big 5. Minimizing costs is what drives FCS.

Those of us in the Gang of 5 cannot maximize revenue on a competitive basis with the Rich 5, but our fans will not tolerate a strictly cost-cutting league either.

Balance is the key.

I've felt all along there were three possible plays and only two make sense for "southern football" which I use as an encompassing region from the southern border of Pennsylvania, south of the Ohio River, plus Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas and Louisiana.

1. Three tier. A "top" league that everyone in the region wants to be in if they can't be in a contract league. Mid-tier league and an entry league.

2. Two tier version 1. A "top" league that everyone in the region wants to be in if they can't be in a contract league. Then two "entry" leagues. One southeastern oriented and one southwestern oriented.

3. Two tier version 2. Two "top" leagues that everyone in the region wants to be in if they can't be in a contract league. One southeastern oriented, one southwestern oriented. Then an "entry" league that spans the two regions.

The first is what we have and it is the least efficient. No league gains the benefits of regionalism (stronger regional TV dollars, ticket and donation driving local rivalries) and the inventory of games doesn't produce high reward from TV.

The second model is where my school would most likely benefit. As long as "market-think" drives decisions, Arkansas State isn't getting called to an upper tier so being in a regionalized league benefits us. The downside for the upper tier league is that it cannot sufficiently over-come higher costs with the higher revenue. The caliber of play spread becomes flatter as the successful teams in the regionalized leagues point to fuller stadiums, banners, and regional TV appearances in recruiting, handing the recruiting advantage to the top regionalized league teams against all but the most successful of the upper tier leagues, but the system is biased toward success so the upper league faces higher risk of being Boise'd by the top teams in the lower tier.

The third model makes the greatest sense. The two upper leagues are regionalized, giving them balance between creating drivable rivalries and games vs TV exposure. The lower tier league is greatly weakened in comparison as schools have to log a lot of miles with no revenue offset just to remain a viable league. The second model is very pro-FCS move-up because promising schools with aspirations can move into a league where costs aren't wildly out-of-line with their FCS experience. The third model is most discouraging to the potential move-up because costs will be significantly higher with no real gain in revenue.

Why not stay with the BE.

$2 mil new TV contract - if true with the current rumors.
$2.5 mil Army / Navy Game cut.
Share of BE Playoff money.
Share of Championship Game money.
Share of BE Bowl revenue.
Access to BE Bowls + Continued access to Bowls outside of the BE that are assosciated with the Academies - i.e. Military Bowl that Army and Navy currently share access to now.

Actually with the extra outside percs Navy has the potential to make more FB revenue than the rest of the NBE teams. The only teams that would outsell them for home games would probaly be ECU, UConn, Cinn, UCF and USF which all have larger stadiums and current higher attendance numbers.

The BE will have Navy in the conference in 2015 along with another school (probably Tulsa with the current predictions) and a Championship Game. Its not the conference they were expecting but it is still better for them financially with the new percs added to the Army / Navy Game payout and the continued financially rewarding relationship with ND. They can still maintain scheduling relationships with Rutgers, Pitt and their other ACC main stays OOC too to fill out their OOC schedules once they join the BE and keep playing other B-10 schools like Penn State and Ohio State too. Joining the NBE in its new configuration will certainly be more lucrative for Navy in 2015 than reamaining independent.

The new basketball league will be top notch. Adding Charlotte when they start FBS fb and another program will only make it better.

Navy is publicly "exploring their options." Internally, Navy is more gone than UCONN or Cincy..."more" simply because they're not a member yet.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

(02-13-2013 07:33 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The new basketball league will be top notch. Adding Charlotte when they start FBS fb and another program will only make it better.

The nB whatever y'all gonna be called ain't getting Charlotte from CUSA.

(02-13-2013 09:08 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 07:33 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The new basketball league will be top notch. Adding Charlotte when they start FBS fb and another program will only make it better.

The nB whatever y'all gonna be called ain't getting Charlotte from CUSA.

I sure hope not.

And Navy ain't joining either. The nBE will be better off staying at least nine teams considering the amount of new TV deal.

(02-13-2013 09:53 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  And Navy ain't joining either. The nBE will be better off staying at least nine teams considering the amount of new TV deal.

I agree at this point I'd stay as small as possible. It's been made clear that no one on the gang of 5 side of the line is worth anything aside from Boise and BYU. Even UCONN and Cincy appear to be relatively worthless. The number will be 10 once Navy bails, and if anymore bail just get to 9 and split the buyouts, TV deal, credits, and gang of 5 money as few ways as possible.

(02-13-2013 11:08 AM)303 Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 06:54 PM)lew240z Wrote:  

(02-12-2013 06:22 PM)303 Wrote:  Navy won't give up ND or Army non-league games, but it has said before that if they can't fit Air Force into the schedule then it's just part of doing business in modern day football.

Whoever said that doesn't know what they are talking about. The Pentagon requires the three academies to play each other for the Commander-in-Chief's Trophy.

http://espn.go.com/ncf/conversations/_/i...s-big-east

"To me, moving into the conference, our first goal in our program is always to beat Army. Then our next goal should be to win the conference," Navy coach Ken Niumatalolo said Tuesday in a phone interview

"If it gets to the point because of scheduling conflicts that we can't play everybody and the schedule is going to become an issue, the Army game will never go anyplace. I'd rather keep Army and Notre Dame and not worry about the Commander-In-Chief's trophy. We're in a conference now. So we need to try to win a conference championship."

That is just his opinion. The admirals and generals at the Pentagon have another. Guess who wins.

(02-13-2013 09:33 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 09:08 PM)BamaScorpio69 Wrote:  

(02-13-2013 07:33 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  The new basketball league will be top notch. Adding Charlotte when they start FBS fb and another program will only make it better.

The nB whatever y'all gonna be called ain't getting Charlotte from CUSA.

I sure hope not.

lol, I agree, No reason for ECU to add two more losses to its schedule every year.

Anybody who thinks Navy will have problems scheduling is crazy. Outside of the obvious Army and Notre Dame games the MAC alone would love to schedule Navy. The MAC already has a special deal with Army and have played a number of games against Navy so it would love to add Navy to that mix. Army and Navy are winnable games with decent household names that can potentially bring non-standard fans to a game. The MAC would probably like to have them for football only but since that is not likely they will take a scheduling deal.

In the past five years Navy has played in regular season:
ACC 6 games
Big East 8 games
Big 10 3 games
CUSA 9 games
MAC 4 games
MWC 6 games
SEC 1 game
Sun Belt 6 games
WAC 5 games

That's pretty diverse and demonstrates that they can get the schedules they want.

I believe those of you saying that Navy will always be able to fill their schedule are correct. Lots of schools want them on their schedule and will work out dates for them.

The other issue that should concern Navy is conference related income. As a football only member, they would be eligible for a share of the new play-off income that the conference receives plus bowl revenue sharing and the tv money. Right now they are able to contract each year for a bowl which gives their football team something to play for outside of the commander in chief trophy.

But I have a question about their current tv contract with CBSsports. Their contract for the Army-Navy game is a separate contract and CBS reportedly pays between $4-5 million for that game alone. Divide that between Army and Navy and those 2 are earning approximately the same for that one game as they would from an annual BE tv payout. I do not know what the football contract for their other home games pays them but it would be interesting to learn. At the time that Navy signed up with the BE they were likely expecting more than the annual $2 million currently projected.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/...in-sports/