(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets.

Unfortunately, it really can't. E.g., no matter how much basketball winning UConn did and how much losing Wake Forest did, Wake Forest still banked the huge media money and has a place at the big boy table in terms of access to bowls and playoffs.

Winning is what we fans value most but it's not what the schools themselves value most. Money is.

(04-13-2014 02:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets.

Unfortunately, it really can't. E.g., no matter how much basketball winning UConn did and how much losing Wake Forest did, Wake Forest still banked the huge media money and has a place at the big boy table in terms of access to bowls and playoffs.

Winning is what we fans value most but it's not what the schools themselves value most. Money is.

Unfortunately, that's true. Nowadays, TV markets drive who's in and who's out - not who's winning. College athletics has sunk to a new low.

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets. We had a great year and no one can take that away.

Some would say that, over time, a smaller budget will result in an inferior product on the field and hardwood - only time will tell, but I don't think that will happen. Money can only do so much for you.

I look forward to seeing the new teams coming into the conference. I think we can develop great atmospheres and intense rivalries.

Eventually either some of the teams will be invited to another power conference or this conference will grow into a true power - and make the money they deserve - again, only time will tell.

But, it's up to each member to continue to develop their programs and win, especially against other power conference teams - and stop the "I want out" talk.

re the bold part...

Yeah, we competed but we were still a bcs conference. Let's see how things look in say, five years after we all have been getting 2million a year and the others get 20mil a year. In five years that gap is going to be evident and in ten years even more so. It's just going to get worse man...two million dollars a year over 10 years vs 20 million dollars a year over 10 years is a HUGE gap.

(04-13-2014 05:43 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets. We had a great year and no one can take that away.

Some would say that, over time, a smaller budget will result in an inferior product on the field and hardwood - only time will tell, but I don't think that will happen. Money can only do so much for you.

I look forward to seeing the new teams coming into the conference. I think we can develop great atmospheres and intense rivalries.

Eventually either some of the teams will be invited to another power conference or this conference will grow into a true power - and make the money they deserve - again, only time will tell.

But, it's up to each member to continue to develop their programs and win, especially against other power conference teams - and stop the "I want out" talk.

re the bold part...

Yeah, we competed but we were still a bcs conference. Let's see how things look in say, five years after we all have been getting 2million a year and the others get 20mil a year. In five years that gap is going to be evident and in ten years even more so. It's just going to get worse man...two million dollars a year over 10 years vs 20 million dollars a year over 10 years is a HUGE gap.

Actually for USF,UConn and UC is around 5 million a year

(04-13-2014 05:43 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets. We had a great year and no one can take that away.

Some would say that, over time, a smaller budget will result in an inferior product on the field and hardwood - only time will tell, but I don't think that will happen. Money can only do so much for you.

I look forward to seeing the new teams coming into the conference. I think we can develop great atmospheres and intense rivalries.

Eventually either some of the teams will be invited to another power conference or this conference will grow into a true power - and make the money they deserve - again, only time will tell.

But, it's up to each member to continue to develop their programs and win, especially against other power conference teams - and stop the "I want out" talk.

re the bold part...

Yeah, we competed but we were still a bcs conference. Let's see how things look in say, five years after we all have been getting 2million a year and the others get 20mil a year. In five years that gap is going to be evident and in ten years even more so. It's just going to get worse man...two million dollars a year over 10 years vs 20 million dollars a year over 10 years is a HUGE gap.

Look at what UCF has done with CUSA money and talent. We never had the "big boy" money that the BCS conferences have had for years but we didn't need it to compete and win a BCS bowl this year. Now, I don't think that top to bottom, every year the American teams will dominate but I think there will always be that surprise from the G5 every year.

(04-13-2014 03:22 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Winning is what we fans value most but it's not what the schools themselves value most. Money is.

Unfortunately, that's true.

Prestige and fame (which winning brings) are also highly valued, especially by state universities. Winning, by the way, results in more generous alumni giving.

(04-13-2014 02:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets.

Unfortunately, it really can't. E.g., no matter how much basketball winning UConn did and how much losing Wake Forest did, Wake Forest still banked the huge media money and has a place at the big boy table in terms of access to bowls and playoffs.

Winning is what we fans value most but it's not what the schools themselves value most. Money is.

Actually, even the money is secondary. In the final analysis, athletics are nothing more than the public face of the university and the primary marketing arm of the school. That's really where "big time" FBS football actually is assumed to contribute to the bottom line. It places the name of the university on the list of "major" schools in the minds of young people long before potential future students are even aware they are forming opinions abut their future possible collegiate destinations. Winning is the BIGGEST factor here. Potential students have no clue how much networks pay conferences (lol. most fans off the message boards don't even know). The money is nice, but a BCS bowl is a big boost. A national championship might be more important to the university than the money as it cements the schools social significance and grants the school the type of long term name recognition that pure advertising could never buy.

Fans need to have some patience with UC, UConn, and USF. Its going to take some time for them to adjust. They will never get over it.
Fans and alumni of those schools have spent many years building institutions of high academics, research, and athletics. A lot of time, money, and effort was required.

At this time, I don't believe any school is leaving The American. The B1G would love to add southern schools, but they are particular. They would choose Virginia and North Carolina, but those schools are not leaving the ACC. The Big12 is in no hurry to expand. If they did, they would like to add FSU and Clemson.

Most of the fans of P5 conferences do not accept AAC schools as worthy. This is true of fans of schools with poorer academics and sports than AAC schools. Cincinnati does $393 million in research every year while Kansas State does $66 million, but KSU fans look down on AAC schools including UC.

(04-13-2014 12:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 12:31 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(04-12-2014 01:15 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  If I was a life long fan of UConn, USF, or UC instead of Memphis; I'd be really disappointed in the situation my university athletic program was left in after the change.

I'm sure that I would have voiced that disappointment in pretty strong terms for a few months. However, I'm just as sure that after a few months, I could find a way to continue to enjoy my university's football, basketball, etc seasons in their new or revised conference home. I'm positive that I would spend my time trying to make everyone else miserable.

I'm glad that you two and most of USF, UConn, UC fans/posters have similar attitudes......despite the huge disappointment in the circumstances.

Thanks Old Tiger. We're in this conference, thus, there is no point in showing excessive disgust about it. I just hope people don't expect too much from the TV renegotiations. And, this is not because I hate this conference and think it stinks. It's because I hate ESPN and think it stinks. I have zero faith that they intend to help us out, regardless of how much we deserve.

We are getting peanuts right now because that's what the market - FOX, ESPN, NBC, etc. - said we were worth as of Spring 2013. It wasn't just ESPN that said it, NBC did too. And by their silent refusal to offer us more, companies like FOX confirmed it.

That's what makes the claim that we were "low-balled" in our current deal so silly: If NBC really did low-ball us, some other network, realizing we were more valuable than their offer, would have stepped in and offered us more. But none did.

If our market value goes up dramatically in the next several years, ESPN will be compelled to pay us that much higher amount or else watch while some other network does so.

But like any other company, ESPN is in business to earn profits, which means buying rights as cheaply as it can, not to help anyone out.

Yep... great points. ESPN definitely did not low ball the AAC. But they did have a big hand in ruining it to the point that the value would be peanuts. Let's see how many other networks show interest in this product in six years.

(04-14-2014 09:53 AM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  Fans need to have some patience with UC, UConn, and USF. Its going to take some time for them to adjust. They will never get over it.
Fans and alumni of those schools have spent many years building institutions of high academics, research, and athletics. A lot of time, money, and effort was required.

At this time, I don't believe any school is leaving The American. The B1G would love to add southern schools, but they are particular. They would choose Virginia and North Carolina, but those schools are not leaving the ACC. The Big12 is in no hurry to expand. If they did, they would like to add FSU and Clemson.

Most of the fans of P5 conferences do not accept AAC schools as worthy. This is true of fans of schools with poorer academics and sports than AAC schools. Cincinnati does $393 million in research every year while Kansas State does $66 million, but KSU fans look down on AAC schools including UC.

Great post Conferences don't make schools great. UAB also happens to be very solid in the research arena as well.

(04-13-2014 05:43 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets. We had a great year and no one can take that away.

Some would say that, over time, a smaller budget will result in an inferior product on the field and hardwood - only time will tell, but I don't think that will happen. Money can only do so much for you.

I look forward to seeing the new teams coming into the conference. I think we can develop great atmospheres and intense rivalries.

Eventually either some of the teams will be invited to another power conference or this conference will grow into a true power - and make the money they deserve - again, only time will tell.

But, it's up to each member to continue to develop their programs and win, especially against other power conference teams - and stop the "I want out" talk.

re the bold part...

Yeah, we competed but we were still a bcs conference. Let's see how things look in say, five years after we all have been getting 2million a year and the others get 20mil a year. In five years that gap is going to be evident and in ten years even more so. It's just going to get worse man...two million dollars a year over 10 years vs 20 million dollars a year over 10 years is a HUGE gap.

It all depends on how the schools prioritize things. We're not getting the $20M handout, but a lot of these schools have plenty of money if they choose to use it to be remain competitive financially. Some of the teams getting the handout just pocket it anyway and don't invest in athletics. I'm not as convinced that the conference revenue disparity will lead to inequality on the field.

(04-15-2014 07:16 AM)uccheese Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 05:43 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets. We had a great year and no one can take that away.

Some would say that, over time, a smaller budget will result in an inferior product on the field and hardwood - only time will tell, but I don't think that will happen. Money can only do so much for you.

I look forward to seeing the new teams coming into the conference. I think we can develop great atmospheres and intense rivalries.

Eventually either some of the teams will be invited to another power conference or this conference will grow into a true power - and make the money they deserve - again, only time will tell.

But, it's up to each member to continue to develop their programs and win, especially against other power conference teams - and stop the "I want out" talk.

re the bold part...

Yeah, we competed but we were still a bcs conference. Let's see how things look in say, five years after we all have been getting 2million a year and the others get 20mil a year. In five years that gap is going to be evident and in ten years even more so. It's just going to get worse man...two million dollars a year over 10 years vs 20 million dollars a year over 10 years is a HUGE gap.

It all depends on how the schools prioritize things. We're not getting the $20M handout, but a lot of these schools have plenty of money if they choose to use it to be remain competitive financially. Some of the teams getting the handout just pocket it anyway and don't invest in athletics. I'm not as convinced that the conference revenue disparity will lead to inequality on the field.

I agree. The $20M initially can make a difference in facilities but you can only build so many.

UC pays Coach TT very well and his staff isn't going hungry. We're remodleing Nippert and looking at the BB facility. We've added the practice bubble and have upgraded our other olympic sports facilities since I attended (mid 70s). So, overall, UC has done well with the money they've earned.

The only thing more money allows is to accelerate those improvements, but with good financial management, they do get done.

(04-14-2014 09:11 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:57 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-13-2014 02:52 PM)mac6115cd Wrote:  As a Bearcat fan, I'm disappointed in not being invited to the "grown-up" table - making $20+M a year. Instead we're at the $2M table.

But this first year proved talent can overcome smaller budgets.

Unfortunately, it really can't. E.g., no matter how much basketball winning UConn did and how much losing Wake Forest did, Wake Forest still banked the huge media money and has a place at the big boy table in terms of access to bowls and playoffs.

Winning is what we fans value most but it's not what the schools themselves value most. Money is.

Actually, even the money is secondary. In the final analysis, athletics are nothing more than the public face of the university and the primary marketing arm of the school. That's really where "big time" FBS football actually is assumed to contribute to the bottom line. It places the name of the university on the list of "major" schools in the minds of young people long before potential future students are even aware they are forming opinions abut their future possible collegiate destinations. Winning is the BIGGEST factor here. Potential students have no clue how much networks pay conferences (lol. most fans off the message boards don't even know). The money is nice, but a BCS bowl is a big boost. A national championship might be more important to the university than the money as it cements the schools social significance and grants the school the type of long term name recognition that pure advertising could never buy.

This is absolutely true. When I moved to NC as a child I was surrounded by UNC and State basketball homers and it made me homesick for one and made me hate those two schools number two. When I saw the Ed Emory Show on TV talking about ECU football that was my school right then and there. I had no idea ECU was an independent, and had no money, and wouldn't have cared anyway. All I knew was I loved football and they weren't UNC or State and I took up the mantle to be a fan of ECU football and now thirty odd years later I have a BS from ECU, my wife has an BSN, my son will be a freshman at ECU next year and my daughter will study fine arts and dance at ECU when she graduates HS in two years. We're truly an ECU family and it all started because of the Ed Emory Show thirty years ago. In other words, as a kid I didn't know of ECU's struggles and didn't care, all I knew was that I loved ECU and still do to this day and will until I die. And none of that had a thing to do with a conference TV contract payout. At the end of the day we are all still humans with the same tendencies we've always had. When a kid sees your team playing on TV, that's what they see, they don't see or care about a conference TV contract payout.