McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

He wouldn't have any idea in this regard.

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

he has been a big hater for ages...read the p6 article i just posted in the other thread

he was the negative nancy in the group of people interviewed ... everyone else differentiated the AAC from the G5..he just made 1 grouping for all the g5 and said its too late

he isn't good at forcasting, or he'd still have a job...

I have a strange feeling that Aresco is going to re up with espn and not take this to the open market. In fact, I have a feeling the story is going to break soon that the AAC has extended with ESPN until 2026/2027 for about 50% more than we are getting now. Not double, 50%. And it will be touted as a huge victory for the AAC in this shaky environment. If I'm right, you guys have to give me props. I hope I'm wrong...

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

I don't see much of an increase coming for him either. As for knowing TV--he must not realize that a small increase over "3.5 million" a team would be a double.

(05-18-2017 09:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

I don't see much of an increase coming for him either.

I see the fired mustache continues his attacks on the AAC. That's no surprise he has never been an unbiased reporter when it comes to this league

(05-18-2017 09:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I have a strange feeling that Aresco is going to re up with espn and not take this to the open market. In fact, I have a feeling the story is going to break soon that the AAC has extended with ESPN until 2026/2027 for about 50% more than we are getting now. Not double, 50%. And it will be touted as a huge victory for the AAC in this shaky environment. If I'm right, you guys have to give me props. I hope I'm wrong...

I think it will be this year as well---but 50% more won't do it. No reason to sign an early deal for that small amount. We get that by just capturing the revenue from the sale of games to CBS-Sports. It has to be enough that there is fear among the AAC presidents that they might get less on the open market. Remember--the realignment fund is allowing UConn to operate as if they have a much larger media deal. So a small increase is basically a cut from current levels.

A 3 million dollar a team contract (50% increase) leaves us in a position where we'd basically have nothing to lose by waiting for the open market bidding.

(05-18-2017 09:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I have a strange feeling that Aresco is going to re up with espn and not take this to the open market. In fact, I have a feeling the story is going to break soon that the AAC has extended with ESPN until 2026/2027 for about 50% more than we are getting now. Not double, 50%. And it will be touted as a huge victory for the AAC in this shaky environment. If I'm right, you guys have to give me props. I hope I'm wrong...

I think it will be this year as well---but 50% more won't do it. No reason to sign an early deal for that small amount. We get that by just capturing the revenue from the sale of games to CBS-Sports. It has to be enough that there is fear among the AAC presidents that they might get less on the open market. Remember--the realignment fund is allowing UConn to operate as if they have a much larger media deal. So a small increase is basically a cut from current levels.

A 3 million dollar a team contract (50% increase) leaves us in a position where we'd basically have nothing to lose by waiting for the open market bidding.

Exactly. But if Aresco and ESPN convince the AAC presidents and AD's that leaving ESPN will not only not net more money elsewhere, but it will hurt scheduling (a sort of warning)...I don't see the conference waiting 2 more years and going to the open market. That's what I'm getting the "feeling" of. The Big East legacy money was spent a lot quicker than what was originally planned. It had to be though as there was a ton of pressure to update facilities build arenas/stadiums etc. and try to separate the AAC in this conference arms race. I'm rambling I know. My prediction: I think panic will rule over patience and I don't think it's the best way to go.

(05-18-2017 09:57 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I have a strange feeling that Aresco is going to re up with espn and not take this to the open market. In fact, I have a feeling the story is going to break soon that the AAC has extended with ESPN until 2026/2027 for about 50% more than we are getting now. Not double, 50%. And it will be touted as a huge victory for the AAC in this shaky environment. If I'm right, you guys have to give me props. I hope I'm wrong...

I think it will be this year as well---but 50% more won't do it. No reason to sign an early deal for that small amount. We get that by just capturing the revenue from the sale of games to CBS-Sports. It has to be enough that there is fear among the AAC presidents that they might get less on the open market. Remember--the realignment fund is allowing UConn to operate as if they have a much larger media deal. So a small increase is basically a cut from current levels.

A 3 million dollar a team contract (50% increase) leaves us in a position where we'd basically have nothing to lose by waiting for the open market bidding.

Exactly. But if Aresco and ESPN convince the AAC presidents and AD's that leaving ESPN will not only not net more money elsewhere, but it will hurt scheduling (a sort of warning)...I don't see the conference waiting 2 more years and going to the open market. That's what I'm getting the "feeling" of. The Big East legacy money was spent a lot quicker than what was originally planned. It had to be though as there was a ton of pressure to update facilities build arenas/stadiums etc. and try to separate the AAC in this conference arms race. I'm rambling I know. My prediction: I think panic will rule over patience and I don't think it's the best way to go.

What I could envision is a 2012 MW style renegotiation. ESPN pays more (maybe 3-4 million a team) for a smaller sized rights package and releases the second and third tier rights back to the AAC so we have large significant rights package to sell on the open market right now. That would be very attractive to schools like UConn that really want thier 3rd tier stuff back. It would also allow Aresco to do some interesting things with CBS, NBC, and streamers. Lots of potential buyers for the returned inventory. It also allowed as ESPN to lock up the content they need without paying more than double what they do now.

(05-18-2017 09:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

I don't see much of an increase coming for him either. As for knowing TV--he must not realize that a small increase over "3.5 million" a team would be a double.

Where is the 3.5 per team coming from? I thought the current deal paid a little over 2 per team? I also saw it quote in th Tampa times article. Quote below.

The AAC's current media rights deals with ESPN and CBS, which expire in full in 2020, pay a fraction (estimated at around $3.5 million per school) of the Power Five's TV contracts. That revenue disparity forces AAC schools to gain monetary ground elsewhere.

(05-18-2017 10:23 PM)PT_american Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

I don't see much of an increase coming for him either. As for knowing TV--he must not realize that a small increase over "3.5 million" a team would be a double.

Where is the 3.5 per team coming from? I thought the current deal paid a little over 2 per team? I also saw it quote in th Tampa times article. Quote below.

The AAC's current media rights deals with ESPN and CBS, which expire in full in 2020, pay a fraction (estimated at around $3.5 million per school) of the Power Five's TV contracts. That revenue disparity forces AAC schools to gain monetary ground elsewhere.

Lol. That was my point. We only make about 2 million. The guy who "knows about tv" doesn't realize that anything much over 3.5 million a team would essentially represent a doubling of our actual 2 million dollar pay. He don't know sheet.

To be fair--the guy asking the question drops the "3.5 million" reference. But McMurphy doesn't correct it.

(05-18-2017 10:34 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 10:23 PM)PT_american Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

I don't see much of an increase coming for him either. As for knowing TV--he must not realize that a small increase over "3.5 million" a team would be a double.

Where is the 3.5 per team coming from? I thought the current deal paid a little over 2 per team? I also saw it quote in th Tampa times article. Quote below.

The AAC's current media rights deals with ESPN and CBS, which expire in full in 2020, pay a fraction (estimated at around $3.5 million per school) of the Power Five's TV contracts. That revenue disparity forces AAC schools to gain monetary ground elsewhere.

Lol. That was my point. We only make about 2 million. The guy who "knows about tv" doesn't realize that anything much over 3.5 million a team would essentially represent a doubling of our actual 2 million dollar pay. He don't know sheet.

To be fair--the guy asking the question drops the "3.5 million" reference. But McMurphy doesn't correct it.

I assume that poster got that number from the Tampa times article someone else posted that indicated it was 3.5. No idea but yeah if the league hits 50% more than that then I think that is a nice improvement. Guess we all shall see. I still think it will fall in the 5-8 range but I think most here are only guessing.

(05-18-2017 10:46 PM)PT_american Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 10:34 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 10:23 PM)PT_american Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 08:51 PM)malenko2 Wrote:  McMurphy has chimed in once again on Twitter. He doesn't see much of an increase coming for the AAC.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Brett_McMurph...9932453889

I don't see much of an increase coming for him either. As for knowing TV--he must not realize that a small increase over "3.5 million" a team would be a double.

Where is the 3.5 per team coming from? I thought the current deal paid a little over 2 per team? I also saw it quote in th Tampa times article. Quote below.

The AAC's current media rights deals with ESPN and CBS, which expire in full in 2020, pay a fraction (estimated at around $3.5 million per school) of the Power Five's TV contracts. That revenue disparity forces AAC schools to gain monetary ground elsewhere.

Lol. That was my point. We only make about 2 million. The guy who "knows about tv" doesn't realize that anything much over 3.5 million a team would essentially represent a doubling of our actual 2 million dollar pay. He don't know sheet.

To be fair--the guy asking the question drops the "3.5 million" reference. But McMurphy doesn't correct it.

I assume that poster got that number from the Tampa times article someone else posted that indicated it was 3.5. No idea but yeah if the league hits 50% more than that then I think that is a nice improvement. Guess we all shall see. I still think it will fall in the 5-8 range but I think most here are only guessing.

The only way you might high 3.5 million number for current media earnings is if your including the realignment fund bump. Most of the new AAC teams might be in that ballpark if you count the realignment fund money.

3.5 may be what the conf paid out to schools, TV, Bowls, BB credits Play off money added in. Just a guess.

(05-18-2017 09:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I have a strange feeling that Aresco is going to re up with espn and not take this to the open market. In fact, I have a feeling the story is going to break soon that the AAC has extended with ESPN until 2026/2027 for about 50% more than we are getting now. Not double, 50%. And it will be touted as a huge victory for the AAC in this shaky environment. If I'm right, you guys have to give me props. I hope I'm wrong...

Aresco already has said ESPN doesn't want to talk until after 2018. If that is the case, We wont be signing real soon.

(05-19-2017 07:59 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 09:10 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  I have a strange feeling that Aresco is going to re up with espn and not take this to the open market. In fact, I have a feeling the story is going to break soon that the AAC has extended with ESPN until 2026/2027 for about 50% more than we are getting now. Not double, 50%. And it will be touted as a huge victory for the AAC in this shaky environment. If I'm right, you guys have to give me props. I hope I'm wrong...

Aresco already has said ESPN doesn't want to talk until after 2018. If that is the case, We wont be signing real soon.

I mean he said if nothing was done in early 2019 he would be able to talk to other networks. I would have to assume he will be talking in 2018 if ESPN really wants to do an extension. Otherwise they no longer have an exclusive window and if other bidders exist they might drive up the price. I still think the best way to maximize value would be to split it up. Do a Big10 type deal where Tier 1 & 2 are split in half between two networks. Say 25 football games and 30 mens b-ball games. The rotate picking which ones they want. Then sell the everything left over as individual packages maybe to CBS sports or maybe some of the silicon value type ideas.

(05-19-2017 07:56 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  3.5 may be what the conf paid out to schools, TV, Bowls, BB credits Play off money added in. Just a guess.

The problem is total payout from the conference varies based on the realignment fund. Some schools get at much as 10 million, some a bit over 3 million---depending on when your schools joined. Other than the Big East legacy schools, most are receiving around 3.3-4.5 million. The 2015 filings (2014 tax documents) are the most recent publicly available. You can see what your school receives in the document. It also appears tha AAC only made a tad over 19 million from media in 2014. I also wonder why we spend a million on legal services.

UConn, Cincy, and USF all get 8-10 million a year---which is why I don't see them being in any hurry to sign an early extension with a smallish raise. A smallish raise will represent a HUGE revenue CUT for those schools. They may opt for something more regional if the high travel cost AAC can't yield more than that.



http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf...06_990.pdf

(05-18-2017 01:39 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I found this from the original Navy joining the Big East. You have to think there must have been an extension clause that allowed Navy to keep the game. Only question is it one time only or renewable end of each contract? I find it ironic, Aresco represented CBS at that time.

From the article

"The Army-Navy game remains on that second Saturday in December," he said.

Gladchuk also said that Navy's television deals with CBS and CBS Sports Network had to be accommodated by the Big East.

"Partnership with CBS was one of the reasons this agreement took a little time to finalize," he said.

CBS owns the TV rights to the Army-Navy game and Navy's home games against Notre Dame through 2018. Navy has a separate deal with CBS Sports Network for the TV rights to its other home games that runs through 2017.

"We have a great relationship with the academies, and our deals will be grandfathered for the length of our contracts" said Mike Aresco, executive vice president for programming at CBS Sports.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...tball-2015

It's hard to extrapolate from the limited bolded statement above, but I don't think it is a stretch to think that the Notre Dame vs. Navy (at Navy) game also falls under a 'special deal' for Navy to renegotiate specifically with CBS...

Will have to wait for clarity...

My hunch is that CBS will be bidding on the American. I have no information, it's just a hunch.

(05-19-2017 10:26 AM)Topkat Wrote:  

(05-18-2017 01:39 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  I found this from the original Navy joining the Big East. You have to think there must have been an extension clause that allowed Navy to keep the game. Only question is it one time only or renewable end of each contract? I find it ironic, Aresco represented CBS at that time.

From the article

"The Army-Navy game remains on that second Saturday in December," he said.

Gladchuk also said that Navy's television deals with CBS and CBS Sports Network had to be accommodated by the Big East.

"Partnership with CBS was one of the reasons this agreement took a little time to finalize," he said.

CBS owns the TV rights to the Army-Navy game and Navy's home games against Notre Dame through 2018. Navy has a separate deal with CBS Sports Network for the TV rights to its other home games that runs through 2017.

"We have a great relationship with the academies, and our deals will be grandfathered for the length of our contracts" said Mike Aresco, executive vice president for programming at CBS Sports.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/sto...tball-2015

It's hard to extrapolate from the limited bolded statement above, but I don't think it is a stretch to think that the Notre Dame vs. Navy (at Navy) game also falls under a 'special deal' for Navy to renegotiate specifically with CBS...

Will have to wait for clarity...

I'm leaning towards the Navy/ND deal also falls under the special agreement. Since they aren't playing these at "home" that might be the workaround. So the amount of navy content isn't a big deal because they aren't providing the big games with the aac deal.