(10-19-2016 04:39 PM)MickMack Wrote:  This is hilarious. The network that just told the majority of the AAC that it did nothing for television is going to cough up additional dollars? Please, tell me more....

Yet that's exactly what ESPN did withe the Big East in 2011 (which was turned down). That's exactly what ESPN did with the MAC a couple of years ago. The MAC got a 10 fold increase while they still had 3 years remaining on thier current deal.

(10-20-2016 06:58 AM)MickMack Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 06:52 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 04:39 PM)MickMack Wrote:  This is hilarious. The network that just told the majority of the AAC that it did nothing for television is going to cough up additional dollars? Please, tell me more....

when what are you talking about..

if you are talking abotu te deal 3 years ago, you and i know everything has changed since then, stability to program brands

Absolutely nothing has changed on our side of the bargaining table. ESPN had complete control over "stability" then just like it does now. ESPN is also going out of its way to tell everyone that AAC programs are inferior and do not move the needle. You may think the AAC product deserves more money, but, unfortunately, that's not how it works.

On the other side of the bargaining table, yes, things have changed very much. Television revenue is dropping off a cliff. Subscribers are down. Two networks likely paid a P5 conference to not add more inventory. ESPN is not going to throw its declining revenue at a product it has gone out of the way to label inferior.

This is really your first time at this rodeo so I don't blame you. ESPN destroyed a BCS conference so that it could consolidate the inventory it wanted and toss everything else to the curb and throw pennies at it. If you think this ends well you haven't been paying attention.

what has changed: since the original aac deal was signed
1) the ACC GoR was signed..we were expected to lose 5-6 more members at the time the deal was signed
2) Houston and SMU were rumored to the MWC... that rumor is dead
3) uconn won 1 mens national title in bball, and won 3 womens title
4) smu has become a national brand in basketball (were dead weights at the time of the deal)
5) our viability as a basketball league has proven itself when plenty thought the left over teams would just disappear
5) ucf, usf, temple & memphis have DRAMATICALLY improved their football brand, who had no national football appeal at the time of the deal (depth)
6) Houston has become the football darling boise once was, when the AAC had no darlings before
7) navy went from a regular 8 win team to a regular top 25 team
8) none of bad teams are viewed as fcs horrible, while a few were at the time of the deal

9) and biggest of all, that deal didnt include navy/army navy/nd..our next deal willl, A HUGE bargaining chip.. if you want 2 of the most valuable games in college football give us a fair price on everything ..they might be willing to lose the AAC, but the Army/Navy game is a top 3 football tradition that has brand equity and gives us leverage

-and this last thing has nothing to do with us, but espn has lost a ridiculous mount of content the last few years by competitors and creating channels (secnetwork/acc netwrok) they wont want to keep empowering their competitors and thinning out their programming
-plus nbcsport is aware of espn matching now, i doubt theyd go low again if they wanted us and make the same mistake twice

im not saying we have the bargaining chip to get 25mil or p5 money, but a lot has dramatically changed to dramaticallyto increase our value and we have gained a ton of leverage the last few years, some our own control, some with the help of other conferences and their decisions

(10-20-2016 07:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 03:00 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 01:13 PM)Comet Wrote:  AAC has no leverage at the moment, what's the point of discussing this?

Start beating your drum now...as Aresco had a brand new conf to try and market last time without any history/success...now he has one in both football AND basketball...

Getting Navy to jump on board last year has really helped...and soon they too will fall in on all the AAC TV Package...so Aresco has a LOT MORE to sell this time around than last time.

He needs to beat the drum every chance he gets (something the former Big East Commish almost never did for their old football conf), as Aresco NEVER turns down a radio, tv or newspaper interview...and keep that exposure up as much as possible...have the THREAT of potentially jumping ship to FOX, CBS or NBC...and then hopefully sticking with ESPN after a nice raise...as ESPN Networks easily gives the conf the most exposure (still isn't at P5 level of course).

Exactly, the inventory is about to significantly change even without adding anyone. You are gonna get all Navy home games into the fold, which includes semi annual games with ND and Air Force, all the league games, and then however the Army-Navy game gets handled once that deal expires. Just that alone would be worth a raise as those games have real value to networks, but then toss in the fact that the league has done far better from a performance and ratings standpoint than anyone would have thought. Now whether we have to wait till the deal expires of if ESPN is willing to do an extension once the fully Navy inventory becomes a part of the package is up for debate, but pushing the narrative does nothing to hurt the league at all.

Would also add that ESPN has lost 50% of thier Big-10 content to Fox. They now have to fill those slots with something---right now the Top AAC games would be the best available alternative. They NEED that AAC content more than they did in 2013 when the deal was signed.

(10-20-2016 07:56 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  I still believe the American would be wise to sign a long term 15 year type deal with a GOR rights if they get 5 to 7 million on the front end and 8 to 10 million on the back end. Stability was the key factor in destroying the TV deal the first time. I believe ESPN will ply to put the American in the position to attract the top the G5 level programs or the Big XII leftovers. Remember its cheaper for ESPN to breakup the Big XII and move the schools it wants to the Big Ten, SEC, or ACC and then pay the leftovers around $8 million or so in the American. This way they prop up the all their products and save money in the process.

Actually, it's not cheaper. Realignment COSTS ESPN money.

Correct me if I am wrong...

We get 2 million per team now. We have 12 teams.

For us to EACH get another million costs ESPN 12 million.

For us to get to 5 million per team, would cost ESPN 36 million.

If ESPN rips out 2 teams, we basically get 'devalued' again... but ESPN has to pay some P5 conference more to take those two teams.

So if you are ESPN, which option do you prefer? Pay 36 million and elevate the AAC; or pay some P5 conference something similar to take two of our teams... and then get the AAC remnants for (more) pennies... as we are today?

(10-20-2016 08:56 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 07:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 03:00 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 01:13 PM)Comet Wrote:  AAC has no leverage at the moment, what's the point of discussing this?

Start beating your drum now...as Aresco had a brand new conf to try and market last time without any history/success...now he has one in both football AND basketball...

Getting Navy to jump on board last year has really helped...and soon they too will fall in on all the AAC TV Package...so Aresco has a LOT MORE to sell this time around than last time.

He needs to beat the drum every chance he gets (something the former Big East Commish almost never did for their old football conf), as Aresco NEVER turns down a radio, tv or newspaper interview...and keep that exposure up as much as possible...have the THREAT of potentially jumping ship to FOX, CBS or NBC...and then hopefully sticking with ESPN after a nice raise...as ESPN Networks easily gives the conf the most exposure (still isn't at P5 level of course).

Exactly, the inventory is about to significantly change even without adding anyone. You are gonna get all Navy home games into the fold, which includes semi annual games with ND and Air Force, all the league games, and then however the Army-Navy game gets handled once that deal expires. Just that alone would be worth a raise as those games have real value to networks, but then toss in the fact that the league has done far better from a performance and ratings standpoint than anyone would have thought. Now whether we have to wait till the deal expires of if ESPN is willing to do an extension once the fully Navy inventory becomes a part of the package is up for debate, but pushing the narrative does nothing to hurt the league at all.

Would also add that ESPN has lost 50% of thier Big-10 content to Fox. They now have to fill those slots with something---right now the Top AAC games would be the best available alternative. They NEED that AAC content more than they did in 2013 when the deal was signed.

This

(10-20-2016 08:56 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 07:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 03:00 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 01:13 PM)Comet Wrote:  AAC has no leverage at the moment, what's the point of discussing this?

Start beating your drum now...as Aresco had a brand new conf to try and market last time without any history/success...now he has one in both football AND basketball...

Getting Navy to jump on board last year has really helped...and soon they too will fall in on all the AAC TV Package...so Aresco has a LOT MORE to sell this time around than last time.

He needs to beat the drum every chance he gets (something the former Big East Commish almost never did for their old football conf), as Aresco NEVER turns down a radio, tv or newspaper interview...and keep that exposure up as much as possible...have the THREAT of potentially jumping ship to FOX, CBS or NBC...and then hopefully sticking with ESPN after a nice raise...as ESPN Networks easily gives the conf the most exposure (still isn't at P5 level of course).

Exactly, the inventory is about to significantly change even without adding anyone. You are gonna get all Navy home games into the fold, which includes semi annual games with ND and Air Force, all the league games, and then however the Army-Navy game gets handled once that deal expires. Just that alone would be worth a raise as those games have real value to networks, but then toss in the fact that the league has done far better from a performance and ratings standpoint than anyone would have thought. Now whether we have to wait till the deal expires of if ESPN is willing to do an extension once the fully Navy inventory becomes a part of the package is up for debate, but pushing the narrative does nothing to hurt the league at all.

Would also add that ESPN has lost 50% of thier Big-10 content to Fox. They now have to fill those slots with something---right now the Top AAC games would be the best available alternative. They NEED that AAC content more than they did in 2013 when the deal was signed.

Also, by 2019, ESPN will be losing more ACC content to the "new" ACC TV Network (yes, ESPN will get a piece of the revenue)...as this new network will obviously need football AND basketball games...almost all currently being shown on ESPN Networks.

With all the other conf basically locked up for the next 8-20 years...AAC might be in a good position to negotiate come 2018/2019 for a better deal.

(10-20-2016 08:56 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 07:41 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 03:00 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 01:13 PM)Comet Wrote:  AAC has no leverage at the moment, what's the point of discussing this?

Start beating your drum now...as Aresco had a brand new conf to try and market last time without any history/success...now he has one in both football AND basketball...

Getting Navy to jump on board last year has really helped...and soon they too will fall in on all the AAC TV Package...so Aresco has a LOT MORE to sell this time around than last time.

He needs to beat the drum every chance he gets (something the former Big East Commish almost never did for their old football conf), as Aresco NEVER turns down a radio, tv or newspaper interview...and keep that exposure up as much as possible...have the THREAT of potentially jumping ship to FOX, CBS or NBC...and then hopefully sticking with ESPN after a nice raise...as ESPN Networks easily gives the conf the most exposure (still isn't at P5 level of course).

Exactly, the inventory is about to significantly change even without adding anyone. You are gonna get all Navy home games into the fold, which includes semi annual games with ND and Air Force, all the league games, and then however the Army-Navy game gets handled once that deal expires. Just that alone would be worth a raise as those games have real value to networks, but then toss in the fact that the league has done far better from a performance and ratings standpoint than anyone would have thought. Now whether we have to wait till the deal expires of if ESPN is willing to do an extension once the fully Navy inventory becomes a part of the package is up for debate, but pushing the narrative does nothing to hurt the league at all.

Would also add that ESPN has lost 50% of thier Big-10 content to Fox. They now have to fill those slots with something---right now the Top AAC games would be the best available alternative. They NEED that AAC content more than they did in 2013 when the deal was signed.

That is what i'm banking on. Espn really needs AAC content now to fill these time slots. We shown the ability to have some ABC level content too. We have uconn hoops and Memphis will eventually get back. We have quality content across the board. If Fox got us, espn gets in a world of content hurt.

AAC should try to get a split deal with ESPN and FOX. Even with the 25 B1G games, I'm sure FOX wants more eastern games for FS1. Especially schools that are willing to play on Thursday or Friday night.

And, as stated above, ESPN needs quality content to fill ESPN/2/U holes from the loss of B1G and ACC inventory.

So, sell 25 games to FOX and 25 games to ESPN.

CBS and NBC could also be in the mix, as Army-Navy and Navy-Notre Dame are valuable games. Not sure that the AAC wants any games on NBCSports though.

(10-19-2016 09:52 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 06:07 PM)First Mate Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 05:43 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 04:48 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I think there are TWO hurdles that Aresco and the AAC need to overcome in the future.
1. TV money
2. Bowl game

These two things separate the AAC from P5
1. We are going to struggle getting P5 money from current TV providers because lack the Big name anchor schools. But if we can get 8-10 million we can still be competitive, he might have to go and take a risk on new providers like Google etc.

2. We need the AAC to get an anchor bowl, maybe the Liberty,Outback, Capital that are based in the home city of one of our schools but to that we will need help from city and also get a partner wether it's Fedex or maybe someone like Underarmor to Adopt the league and put big money for the bowl game and demand as part the the AAC champ goes there with the money they put up a quality P5 opponent cann be gathered.
Maybe get such a deal by having the entire league sign under one provider like Nike,Undearmor etc thus that brand will have an economic tie to the league success

Good post

Agree. We need a good anchor bowl for our champion when they aren't in a NY6 or playoff.

Most bowls are starting their 3rd year of the Six Year deal. It will be at least two more years before bowls start looking for Tie-Ins. This does not include the CFP bowls because their contract was for 12 years.

I mean I know the deals don't run out but some are already inking extensions. See Big 12 deal below so I hope we are at least in contact with the bowls we think we have a chance to maybe get into or are trying to negotiate into them now before they are re-upped.

Big 12 Extends Contract with Valero Alamo Bowl
August 31, 2016

The Big 12 Conference has established a new agreement with the Valero Alamo Bowl to extend the existing relationship through 2025.

(10-18-2016 07:04 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  Wichita St. would add value to this league as a non-football school. We should add them as soon as possible I think.

The problem with Wichita State, will be Wichita State. While they would be a fantastic addition to the AAC in olympic sports, the AAC is simply too far flung for Wichita State. The cost of travel would not be feasible.

I don't think the AAC will or should add any non-football members. Since football is the driving force for Tv revenue, expansion should only be made if the new member brings more money for existing members. I don't see this happening before 2018.

IMO, there are only (2) programs not competing as P5's who might have interest and are capable of bringing more value to the AAC; Army and Air Force. They both have national/global followings, they both heavily recruit inside the current AAC footprint, and even more importantly, they share a unique tradition with each other and Navy which cannot be overstated. Army wanting to give up Independence, and Air Force giving up longstanding geographic ties may be a very difficult sell. However,, I don't think it's entirely impossible if Aresco can significantly separate the CURRENT AAC from the other G5 in terms of Tv money and better bowl access. If that were to happen I believe Aresco would have a better chance of the attention of Army and Air Force's, which in turn will open up the wallet of the Networks due to the quality of new inventory.

Two additional reasons the DoD might have interest in having all 3 academies in the AAC is the fact that all 3 heavily recruit Texas and the guarantee of 1 annual game in Texas, plus the level of exposure ESPN offers the AAC could be a real recruiting boom for the Military. Also, the MWC currently has zero presence in Texas. Another key factor is the significant change that has taken place in MWC membership since it was created, and only a few remaining programs (CSU, UNM, WYO) have much a rivalry of significant interest with Air Force. I would think 1-3 of the rivalries could continue as Air Force vs Army/Navy games would open up 2 OOC games for Air Force annually.


just my .02

TX

(10-20-2016 07:56 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  I still believe the American would be wise to sign a long term 15 year type deal with a GOR rights if they get 5 to 7 million on the front end and 8 to 10 million on the back end. Stability was the key factor in destroying the TV deal the first time. I believe ESPN will ply to put the American in the position to attract the top the G5 level programs or the Big XII leftovers. Remember its cheaper for ESPN to breakup the Big XII and move the schools it wants to the Big Ten, SEC, or ACC and then pay the leftovers around $8 million or so in the American. This way they prop up the all their products and save money in the process.

You really need to stop spiking your coffee with Drano.

No GOR for the dollar amounts you're quoting. At all. Ever

(10-18-2016 08:50 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 03:55 PM)Chappy Wrote:  Gotta get Army & BYU on board.

Most valuable properties out there.

Less than 10 posts in and back to fantasy island


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Which schools out there are more valuable than Army and BYU?

Sure as heck, it is not Georgia State and the Sun Belt gang.

Army and BYU have fans, Georgia State has more popcorn vendors than fans.

(10-20-2016 01:30 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 08:50 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 03:55 PM)Chappy Wrote:  Gotta get Army & BYU on board.

Most valuable properties out there.

Less than 10 posts in and back to fantasy island


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Which schools out there are more valuable than Army and BYU?

Sure as heck, it is not Georgia State and the Sun Belt gang.

Army and BYU have fans, Georgia State has more popcorn vendors than fans.

BYU will never join a conference not on par with the current P5. As an Independent BYU is receiving P5 recognition. I believe Air Force would be the other program with such value.

TX

(10-20-2016 01:37 PM)texcane1982 Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 01:30 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 08:50 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 03:55 PM)Chappy Wrote:  Gotta get Army & BYU on board.

Most valuable properties out there.

Less than 10 posts in and back to fantasy island


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Which schools out there are more valuable than Army and BYU?

Sure as heck, it is not Georgia State and the Sun Belt gang.

Army and BYU have fans, Georgia State has more popcorn vendors than fans.

BYU will never join a conference not on par with the current P5. As an Independent BYU is receiving P5 recognition. I believe Air Force would be the other program with such value.

TX

"...BYU is receiving P5 recognition.....". Really, from whom?

(10-20-2016 01:55 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 01:37 PM)texcane1982 Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 01:30 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 08:50 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 03:55 PM)Chappy Wrote:  Gotta get Army & BYU on board.

Most valuable properties out there.

Less than 10 posts in and back to fantasy island


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Which schools out there are more valuable than Army and BYU?

Sure as heck, it is not Georgia State and the Sun Belt gang.

Army and BYU have fans, Georgia State has more popcorn vendors than fans.

BYU will never join a conference not on par with the current P5. As an Independent BYU is receiving P5 recognition. I believe Air Force would be the other program with such value.

TX

"...BYU is receiving P5 recognition.....". Really, from whom?

I'm gonna jump for for the interception now before someone says "conferences count them as P5 for scheduling." There's a rather large difference between falling into a category for scheduling purposes and actual recognition and perception as part of the club. BYU has the first but certainly not the second.

(10-20-2016 01:58 PM)justin_sane15 Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 01:55 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 01:37 PM)texcane1982 Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 01:30 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-18-2016 08:50 PM)panama Wrote:  Less than 10 posts in and back to fantasy island


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Which schools out there are more valuable than Army and BYU?

Sure as heck, it is not Georgia State and the Sun Belt gang.

Army and BYU have fans, Georgia State has more popcorn vendors than fans.

BYU will never join a conference not on par with the current P5. As an Independent BYU is receiving P5 recognition. I believe Air Force would be the other program with such value.

TX

"...BYU is receiving P5 recognition.....". Really, from whom?

I'm gonna jump for for the interception now before someone says "conferences count them as P5 for scheduling." There's a rather large difference between falling into a category for scheduling purposes and actual recognition and perception as part of the club. BYU has the first but certainly not the second.

Exactly, there's a whole group of G5 schools that count as P5 for scheduling - I think the language is "designated" but it only holds for the game played.

(10-20-2016 12:38 PM)YNot Wrote:  AAC should try to get a split deal with ESPN and FOX. Even with the 25 B1G games, I'm sure FOX wants more eastern games for FS1. Especially schools that are willing to play on Thursday or Friday night.

And, as stated above, ESPN needs quality content to fill ESPN/2/U holes from the loss of B1G and ACC inventory.

So, sell 25 games to FOX and 25 games to ESPN.

CBS and NBC could also be in the mix, as Army-Navy and Navy-Notre Dame are valuable games. Not sure that the AAC wants any games on NBCSports though.

Have been saying all year that the AAC has officially become a solid product for ESPN, especially on Thursday, Friday and Noon on Saturday. AAC gives ESPN good content for the not so great noon timespan on Saturday.

P5 fans who are looking for football to watch before their teams play later in the afternoon get to watch a good product at noon before the main event. If ESPN puts any other conference in these time slots on a regular basis they will get complaints about bad product.

This is where our value to ESPN comes into play. We give them respectable product with respectable name brands in time slots that few P5 schools want.

IMO,coupled with our basketball , we are going to get a contract in the 7-9 million range.

(10-20-2016 08:51 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 06:58 AM)MickMack Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 06:52 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 04:39 PM)MickMack Wrote:  This is hilarious. The network that just told the majority of the AAC that it did nothing for television is going to cough up additional dollars? Please, tell me more....

when what are you talking about..

if you are talking abotu te deal 3 years ago, you and i know everything has changed since then, stability to program brands

Absolutely nothing has changed on our side of the bargaining table. ESPN had complete control over "stability" then just like it does now. ESPN is also going out of its way to tell everyone that AAC programs are inferior and do not move the needle. You may think the AAC product deserves more money, but, unfortunately, that's not how it works.

On the other side of the bargaining table, yes, things have changed very much. Television revenue is dropping off a cliff. Subscribers are down. Two networks likely paid a P5 conference to not add more inventory. ESPN is not going to throw its declining revenue at a product it has gone out of the way to label inferior.

This is really your first time at this rodeo so I don't blame you. ESPN destroyed a BCS conference so that it could consolidate the inventory it wanted and toss everything else to the curb and throw pennies at it. If you think this ends well you haven't been paying attention.

what has changed: since the original aac deal was signed
1) the ACC GoR was signed..we were expected to lose 5-6 more members at the time the deal was signed
2) Houston and SMU were rumored to the MWC... that rumor is dead
3) uconn won 1 mens national title in bball, and won 3 womens title
4) smu has become a national brand in basketball (were dead weights at the time of the deal)
5) our viability as a basketball league has proven itself when plenty thought the left over teams would just disappear
5) ucf, usf, temple & memphis have DRAMATICALLY improved their football brand, who had no national football appeal at the time of the deal (depth)
6) Houston has become the football darling boise once was, when the AAC had no darlings before
7) navy went from a regular 8 win team to a regular top 25 team
8) none of bad teams are viewed as fcs horrible, while a few were at the time of the deal

9) and biggest of all, that deal didnt include navy/army navy/nd..our next deal willl, A HUGE bargaining chip.. if you want 2 of the most valuable games in college football give us a fair price on everything ..they might be willing to lose the AAC, but the Army/Navy game is a top 3 football tradition that has brand equity and gives us leverage

-and this last thing has nothing to do with us, but espn has lost a ridiculous mount of content the last few years by competitors and creating channels (secnetwork/acc netwrok) they wont want to keep empowering their competitors and thinning out their programming
-plus nbcsport is aware of espn matching now, i doubt theyd go low again if they wanted us and make the same mistake twice

im not saying we have the bargaining chip to get 25mil or p5 money, but a lot has dramatically changed to dramaticallyto increase our value and we have gained a ton of leverage the last few years, some our own control, some with the help of other conferences and their decisions

I don't think Navy is going to sign their rights away. They put that in their agreement when they joined the big east. The AAC would have to offer navy more than they make now which will be doubtful with how things have been going with tv contracts.

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/I...Navy.aspx?

(10-20-2016 03:09 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 08:51 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-20-2016 06:58 AM)MickMack Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 06:52 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(10-19-2016 04:39 PM)MickMack Wrote:  This is hilarious. The network that just told the majority of the AAC that it did nothing for television is going to cough up additional dollars? Please, tell me more....

when what are you talking about..

if you are talking abotu te deal 3 years ago, you and i know everything has changed since then, stability to program brands

Absolutely nothing has changed on our side of the bargaining table. ESPN had complete control over "stability" then just like it does now. ESPN is also going out of its way to tell everyone that AAC programs are inferior and do not move the needle. You may think the AAC product deserves more money, but, unfortunately, that's not how it works.

On the other side of the bargaining table, yes, things have changed very much. Television revenue is dropping off a cliff. Subscribers are down. Two networks likely paid a P5 conference to not add more inventory. ESPN is not going to throw its declining revenue at a product it has gone out of the way to label inferior.

This is really your first time at this rodeo so I don't blame you. ESPN destroyed a BCS conference so that it could consolidate the inventory it wanted and toss everything else to the curb and throw pennies at it. If you think this ends well you haven't been paying attention.

what has changed: since the original aac deal was signed
1) the ACC GoR was signed..we were expected to lose 5-6 more members at the time the deal was signed
2) Houston and SMU were rumored to the MWC... that rumor is dead
3) uconn won 1 mens national title in bball, and won 3 womens title
4) smu has become a national brand in basketball (were dead weights at the time of the deal)
5) our viability as a basketball league has proven itself when plenty thought the left over teams would just disappear
5) ucf, usf, temple & memphis have DRAMATICALLY improved their football brand, who had no national football appeal at the time of the deal (depth)
6) Houston has become the football darling boise once was, when the AAC had no darlings before
7) navy went from a regular 8 win team to a regular top 25 team
8) none of bad teams are viewed as fcs horrible, while a few were at the time of the deal

9) and biggest of all, that deal didnt include navy/army navy/nd..our next deal willl, A HUGE bargaining chip.. if you want 2 of the most valuable games in college football give us a fair price on everything ..they might be willing to lose the AAC, but the Army/Navy game is a top 3 football tradition that has brand equity and gives us leverage

-and this last thing has nothing to do with us, but espn has lost a ridiculous mount of content the last few years by competitors and creating channels (secnetwork/acc netwrok) they wont want to keep empowering their competitors and thinning out their programming
-plus nbcsport is aware of espn matching now, i doubt theyd go low again if they wanted us and make the same mistake twice

im not saying we have the bargaining chip to get 25mil or p5 money, but a lot has dramatically changed to dramaticallyto increase our value and we have gained a ton of leverage the last few years, some our own control, some with the help of other conferences and their decisions

I don't think Navy is going to sign their rights away. They put that in their agreement when they joined the big east. The AAC would have to offer navy more than they make now which will be doubtful with how things have been going with tv contracts.

http://m.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/I...Navy.aspx?

I honestly think the new deal will be somewhere in the range of 6-10 million which will be higher than what Navy is getting today. I know they get 2.5 for the Army/Navy game but I haven't seen anything that publishes what they get for total revenue from TV, however i would guess it is lower than 6 total and probably around 4.5.

Given how outspoken their AD was about a special deal for Boise I can't see them demanding a special deal for themselves. I think they will make far more in the conference than they do today which is why the joined to begin with.