Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

(06-07-2016 12:58 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  Brad responded to the $6.2 million dollar difference.

"Much of that (6.2 million) is networks covering TV production costs rather than individual schools. That saves schools $$."

One additional attempt to make lemonade out of a lemon. Is it at all possible that the 6.2 million is the cost to the conf as a whole to upgrade all of our tv capabilities for the streaming side of things and so the 9 million figure is ours but we have to spend most of it for this purpose? ESPN3 and others? If so and if that is paid for this year so that fb and basketball can be streamed in 2016-17, will there be 9 million next year to split among the schools?

(06-09-2016 09:54 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 12:58 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  Brad responded to the $6.2 million dollar difference.

"Much of that (6.2 million) is networks covering TV production costs rather than individual schools. That saves schools $$."

One additional attempt to make lemonade out of a lemon. Is it at all possible that the 6.2 million is the cost to the conf as a whole to upgrade all of our tv capabilities for the streaming side of things and so the 9 million figure is ours but we have to spend most of it for this purpose? ESPN3 and others? If so and if that is paid for this year so that fb and basketball can be streamed in 2016-17, will there be 9 million next year to split among the schools?

No. Not at all. The logistics of moving equipment and people around the country, and paying for staff (including the on-air personalities) are just a few examples of "production costs."

These "costs" are expense items on the networks balance sheet. In other words the cost of doing business. TV deals are always reported in terms revenue (i.e. cash generated from the deal) not from "hey we aren't going to make you pay for our other expenses that we've never made anyone else ever pay for either and so that's the benefits for you in this deal."

It's maliciously misleading for anyone associated with the conference to try to spin this by using the term "true value" of the deal. The analogy for me getting hired in a new job and they tell me the salary is 100,000 annually but then I get my first pay check and I realize that it is much less than what I was expecting. In response, the company tells me that's because my earnings are $70,000 and $30,000 of my pay is in fringe benefits, but $100K is the "true value" of my pay.

(06-09-2016 10:11 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:54 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(06-07-2016 12:58 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  Brad responded to the $6.2 million dollar difference.

"Much of that (6.2 million) is networks covering TV production costs rather than individual schools. That saves schools $$."

One additional attempt to make lemonade out of a lemon. Is it at all possible that the 6.2 million is the cost to the conf as a whole to upgrade all of our tv capabilities for the streaming side of things and so the 9 million figure is ours but we have to spend most of it for this purpose? ESPN3 and others? If so and if that is paid for this year so that fb and basketball can be streamed in 2016-17, will there be 9 million next year to split among the schools?

No. Not at all. The logistics of moving equipment and people around the country, and paying for staff (including the on-air personalities) are just a few examples of "production costs."

These "costs" are expense items on the networks balance sheet. In other words the cost of doing business. TV deals are always reported in terms revenue (i.e. cash generated from the deal) not from "hey we aren't going to make you pay for our other expenses that we've never made anyone else ever pay for either and so that's the benefits for you in this deal."

It's maliciously misleading for anyone associated with the conference to try to spin this by using the term "true value" of the deal. The analogy for me is if I get hired in a new job and they tell me the salary is 100,000 annually but then I get my first pay check and I realize that it is much less than what I was expecting. In response, the company tells me that's because my earnings are $70,000 and $30,000 of my pay is in fringe benefits, but $100K is the "true value" of my pay.

And they added office supplies, work computer, desk, etc. costs to your salary.

(06-09-2016 09:37 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Sit down over a cup of hemlock.

(06-09-2016 10:16 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:37 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Yeah, maybe UCF, USF, FIU, and FAU should get together

(06-09-2016 08:05 AM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 06:52 AM)herdinva Wrote:  

(06-08-2016 03:20 PM)FlyHawk98 Wrote:  Arkansas State > North Texas

Appalachian State > Charlotte

Ga Southern > FIU


Imagine if we would have done that instead of what we did.

This conference would be looking pretty tough if you ask me.

While App and Ga So. worked well for the belt, they were 1AA during the time of our realignment. CUSA didn't need more 1AA teams and there was no way to know how those two schools would have prospered or if theyd have major growing pains.

North Texas was a good add, substitute a different team to get Ark St. and we'd be talking

Old Dominion, Charlotte, and UTSA didn't even have teams lol


FCS is better than no program at all.

Plus App State and Ga Southern are PROVEN to be good football programs through both fan support, and winning tradition.

No comparison between now....or ever for that matter.


Edit: ODU had a team, but it was a brand new FCS program. I like the addition of them. They were worth taking the gamble as they had proven to have a quickly growing fan base at the FCS level.

Wasn't my point. ODU exploded on the FCS scene when they fielded a team. I wasn't arguing whether or not App or GSU would have been better than the FCS adds we already took in. I was arguing that there was no way we should have been bringing ALL of them in. I wouldn't trade ODU out though. UTSA was already in transition mode in the WAC when we added them, same as texas state when they went to the belt. So that part isn't accurate either.

In a perfect world I would have said no to adding any FCS teams, CUSA was never seen as a breeder league and didn't want it to start when we had to add, but its not a perfect world. I liked Charlotte for their basketball history and didn't like it for the growing pains they were facing in football. ODU was a no brainer, good basketball, good football support. Was app or GSU a better option at that point? Hard to argue in football they probably were but still, as with an FCS move up, you have no idea if they would be ok or go through the same growing pains as any other FCS program during that time. In basketball not so much. I still would have rather had already established FBS schools only come in, because again, CUSA was never seen as a breeder league, then all of a sudden we partly became one...........

(06-09-2016 12:02 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 10:16 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:37 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Yeah, maybe UCF, USF, FIU, and FAU should get together

We do play FIU and FAU in OOC so we are meeting our requirements. In seriousness, it makes perfect sense to tighten up both leagues into more regional leagues.

UCF fits better in the Belt. Move USM to the AAC to give them a serious football presence in the south.

I like this game.

(06-09-2016 10:16 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:37 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Just some wishful thinking on my part. I don't have much hope of it happening either.

(06-09-2016 03:53 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 10:16 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:37 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Just some wishful thinking on my part. I don't have much hope of it happening either.

We probably need a few of the weaker programs in both conferences (and maybe others in the MAC and MWC?) to voluntarily drop out of FBS football before that can happen.

Bowling Green went 11-1 in 1991. The only time the Falcons appeared on national television that whole year was the bowl game: a win in the California Bowl over Fresno State aired by Sports Channel.

If anyone had told me back then that ESPN and other cable channels would pay each school in the MAC $200,000 per year for the right to air some of our games, I would have been thrilled.

Obviously that was a different era. Even so, I wouldn't sell short the importance of the exposure Conference USA will get through this deal. It probably still beats any exposure schools would be able to get on their own by "walk(ing) away" from the offer or going independent.

With that said,

(06-07-2016 12:43 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  would the MAC not become a better spot for Marshall if this report is true?

I'd welcome this if it happened. That's just me, though.

(06-09-2016 05:39 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  Bowling Green went 11-1 in 1991. The only time the Falcons appeared on national television that whole year was the bowl game: a win in the California Bowl over Fresno State aired by Sports Channel.

If anyone had told me back then that ESPN and other cable channels would pay each school in the MAC $200,000 per year for the right to air some of our games, I would have been thrilled.

Obviously that was a different era. Even so, I wouldn't sell short the importance of the exposure Conference USA will get through this deal. It probably still beats any exposure schools would be able to get on their own by "walk(ing) away" from the offer or going independent.

With that said,

(06-07-2016 12:43 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  would the MAC not become a better spot for Marshall if this report is true?

I'd welcome this if it happened. That's just me, though.

I'd be fine with Marshall coming home too

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

(06-09-2016 07:22 AM)wh49er Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 05:47 AM)WEARE Wrote:  I'm not flaming any school, but to solicit teams with no results, fan base, or brand without expecting the conference money to drop significantly is foolish. These start-ups and fresh big market schools may be great and outperform the all the teams of this conference one day, but one day hasn't come to pass. You don't get paid for potential.

You may have a point on the results part but to say Charlotte and ODU had no fanbase is a flat out lie. Both schools have had solid basketball programs over the years and have slowly been gaining fans since the 70s.

Also, no team in this league has a true national brand or anything outside of a recognizable name.

Did you read my first sentence? I didn't mention ODU or Charlotte. You made that assumption. I am honestly not trying to bait other programs. They may become great and blow everyone away. Who knows?

I agree that no school in our conference is bringing in the nation; however, some schools do have something of a brand. Those programs generate more interest than others, and those programs have taken a step back. I don't blame any school for moving up. It is what you are supposed to be doing, yet I am sure you can understand why this might seem a tad troublesome to other schools. This is just the truth, plain and simple.

In the end, I trust our AD. All we can do is play the game and hope for the best.

(06-09-2016 04:21 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 03:53 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 10:16 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:37 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Just some wishful thinking on my part. I don't have much hope of it happening either.

We probably need a few of the weaker programs in both conferences (and maybe others in the MAC and MWC?) to voluntarily drop out of FBS football before that can happen.

Yeah like Rice

(06-09-2016 07:24 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 04:21 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 03:53 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 10:16 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 09:37 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  Judy and Karl need to sit down over a cup of coffee, agree to suspend entrance & exit fees and realign these insanely far flung conferences. It's also time some schools got over themselves and a little common sense take center stage.

It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Just some wishful thinking on my part. I don't have much hope of it happening either.

We probably need a few of the weaker programs in both conferences (and maybe others in the MAC and MWC?) to voluntarily drop out of FBS football before that can happen.

Yeah like Rice

You do know Rice has world class academics and almost equally as good baseball? Rice is not a problem. Some schools are a problem for CUSA, but Rice is not one of them.

(06-09-2016 05:39 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  Bowling Green went 11-1 in 1991. The only time the Falcons appeared on national television that whole year was the bowl game: a win in the California Bowl over Fresno State aired by Sports Channel.

If anyone had told me back then that ESPN and other cable channels would pay each school in the MAC $200,000 per year for the right to air some of our games, I would have been thrilled.

Obviously that was a different era. Even so, I wouldn't sell short the importance of the exposure Conference USA will get through this deal. It probably still beats any exposure schools would be able to get on their own by "walk(ing) away" from the offer or going independent.

With that said,

(06-07-2016 12:43 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  would the MAC not become a better spot for Marshall if this report is true?

I'd welcome this if it happened. That's just me, though.

The problem with this is I'm not convinced that the exposure is better.

For starters (looking at this from a league-wide perspective), people are going to have to hunt for where to find us. No one is going to do that in G5 land except fans of the schools. Perhaps more important is the fact that instead of having a tiered approach where you know where most games in the conference will be we are spread across five different platforms. Very difficult to build brand through exposure that way. If all of our games were going to be - at a minimum - streamed across the Watch ESPN platform then I would say ok. Exposure is better, but we are not. Only 10 games plus the other five on the ESPN networks. Aside from those 15 games, people will have to go an Easter Egg hunt to find C-USA.

Lastly, from an anecdotal perspective, Middle Tennessee only has three games televised and two of them are on this new BeIn platform. Perhaps we get more but right now it's three. We had 11 of our 12 games televised in our last year in the Sun Belt. We had 10 of 12 televised in our first year in C-USA and now we are down to three. Think about that. And this is with a team that has a good chance to win the East this year.

(06-09-2016 10:29 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 07:24 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 04:21 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 03:53 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(06-09-2016 10:16 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  It really makes sense to swap a few members around to limit travel expenses. Doubt it will happen though.

Just some wishful thinking on my part. I don't have much hope of it happening either.

We probably need a few of the weaker programs in both conferences (and maybe others in the MAC and MWC?) to voluntarily drop out of FBS football before that can happen.

Yeah like Rice

You do know Rice has world class academics and almost equally as good baseball? Rice is not a problem. Some schools are a problem for CUSA, but Rice is not one of them.

Rice also has a six billion dollar endowment it can spend any way it wants.

Going back to the topic about TV, here is a press release about the technology Rice will use to upgrade production value for streaming:

https://www.productionhub.com/press-rele...gy-upgrade