Are there still those that think the AAC is going to get $7-10 million next time around?

$20 Mil per school.

RutQuoHood tears.

(10-31-2017 08:36 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  $20 Mil per school.

RutQuoHood tears.

Got it.

Could you explain why you think this will be the case?

(10-31-2017 08:30 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Are there still those that think the AAC is going to get $7-10 million next time around?

Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

(10-27-2017 08:35 PM)Ocalabull Wrote:  

(10-27-2017 08:29 PM)fanhood Wrote:  I enjoy this, as I despise ESPN.

However, those that are expecting some massive pay raise for the AAC should take notice to this. I find it highly, highly unlikely, that the AAC will get anywhere close to what many here desire. Expect ~$3 million or so.

Maybe they should just stick to airing sports and not push a political agenda down our throats. People watch sports as an escape from that crap...

I only watch ESPIN when there's a game on. I never have really cared for the shows and rarely watched SC. I did listen to their radio shows everyday. I stopped during the election because of all the political crap they were constantly spewing.

(10-31-2017 08:57 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:30 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Are there still those that think the AAC is going to get $7-10 million next time around?

Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all as people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is a sports related topic.

Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

(10-31-2017 09:49 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:57 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:30 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Are there still those that think the AAC is going to get $7-10 million next time around?

Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all all people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is certainly a sports related topic. Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

(10-31-2017 10:00 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 09:49 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:57 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:30 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Are there still those that think the AAC is going to get $7-10 million next time around?

Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all all people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is certainly a sports related topic. Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

All fair points here.

One thing to note, $7-10 million has been said here many times, and I have commented that that number is insane. People have then shouted me down. I think the Memphis President said the $10 million number as well. I just want to know if people here still think that is close to possible.

As always, I have said that ~$3 million is probably likely. $5 million would be a HUGE victory, and I would laud the AAC for it.

$25 Mil per school.

(10-31-2017 10:46 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  $25 Mil per school.

per Football school. WSU will get a roll of quarters and a laundromat.

(10-31-2017 10:53 AM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:46 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  $25 Mil per school.

per Football school. WSU will get a roll of quarters and a laundromat.

Still better than the bag of lint you'd be getting in the MVC...

(10-31-2017 10:56 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:53 AM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:46 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  $25 Mil per school.

per Football school. WSU will get a roll of quarters and a laundromat.

Still better than the bag of lint you'd be getting in the MVC...

Absolutely. Over time, we'll be able to launder some serious cash.

I think that's how it works. I may need RutgersGuy to run through the details for me.

(10-31-2017 10:41 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:00 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 09:49 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:57 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:30 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Are there still those that think the AAC is going to get $7-10 million next time around?

Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all all people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is certainly a sports related topic. Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

All fair points here.

One thing to note, $7-10 million has been said here many times, and I have commented that that number is insane. People have then shouted me down. I think the Memphis President said the $10 million number as well. I just want to know if people here still think that is close to possible.

As always, I have said that ~$3 million is probably likely. $5 million would be a HUGE victory, and I would laud the AAC for it.

3 million is about as ridiculous as 10 million. CBS spends 12 million for a MW package that includes no Boise home games (which is the biggest MW TV draw). We know, even including Boise, AAC games draw more viewers than MW games. We also know CBS paid that 7 million for CUSA games--yet preferred to buy AAC games from ESPN over showing all the CUSA games they had purchased. Thus, we know CBS Sports is willing to pay more for the AAC than 7 million. CUSA didnt have USF, Cinci, UConn, Temple, or Navy in that old CBS deal. We also know CBS was paying seperately for Navy rights---so it should also be noted that the current AAC ESPN deal didnt include Navy for most years (those rights remained with CBS-Sports until after 2018).

Id also mention that AAC basketball, now with Wichita, UConn, Cinci, Temple, SMU, Memphis, etc is going to be a very attractive college basketball property. The BE gets 4 million a team just for basketball. I doubt we get that for basketball---but there is significant value in AAC basketball. Thats a lot of good winter inventory for a sports network.

So a moderate raise from ESPN for the games they actually show coupled with the ACC regaining their 2nd tier rights to sell to CBS (or NBC) will easily get the AAC to 4 million a team. Thats the rock bottom floor. The top depends on how aggressive the bidding gets. If NBC is involved (and I think they will be), things could get interesting.

(10-31-2017 11:18 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:41 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:00 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 09:49 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 08:57 AM)Bull Wrote:  Welcome to talk sports here, but if you want to talk politics of money... worry about your own beat up house.

We want something 'fair' that allows us to keep up with the P5. On their current deals, we may hope for 7-10... but the landscape is changing. Market forces will dictate what we get... so we try to stay as attractive as possible. We want to play with the big boys. It's too bad the G4 don't have that same aspiration.

I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all all people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is certainly a sports related topic. Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

All fair points here.

One thing to note, $7-10 million has been said here many times, and I have commented that that number is insane. People have then shouted me down. I think the Memphis President said the $10 million number as well. I just want to know if people here still think that is close to possible.

As always, I have said that ~$3 million is probably likely. $5 million would be a HUGE victory, and I would laud the AAC for it.

3 million is about as ridiculous as 10 million. CBS spends 12 million for a MW package that includes no Boise home games (which is the biggest MW TV draw). We know, even including Boise, AAC games draw more viewers than MW games. We also know CBS paid that 7 million for CUSA games--yet preferred to buy AAC games from ESPN over showing all the CUSA games they had purchased. Thus, we know CBS Sports is willing to pay more for the AAC than 7 million. CUSA didnt have USF, Cinci, UConn, Temple, or Navy in that old CBS deal. We also know CBS was paying seperately for Navy rights---so it should also be noted that the current AAC ESPN deal didnt include Navy for most years (those rights remained with CBS-Sports until after 2018).

Id also mention that AAC basketball, now with Wichita, UConn, Cinci, Temple, SMU, Memphis, etc is going to be a very attractive college basketball property. The BE gets 4 million a team just for basketball. I doubt we get that for basketball---but there is significant value in AAC basketball. Thats a lot of good winter inventory for a sports network.

So a moderate raise from ESPN for the games they actually show coupled with the ACC regaining their 2nd tier rights to sell to CBS (or NBC) will easily get the AAC to 4 million a team. Thats the rock bottom floor. The top depends on how aggressive the bidding gets. If NBC is involved (and I think they will be), things could get interesting.

We'll see. I hope you are right. I would laud anything at ~$5 million.

I am not convinced that basketball matters at all, but I don't know.

The AAC's contract will set the market, so I am uniquely interested here. If I recall, the AAC is prior to BYU's renewal, the MW, as well as the rest of the market, correct?

(10-31-2017 10:46 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  $25 Mil per school.

25M + 5M bonus for WSU after back-to-back-to-back Natty's + an HBO, SHOWTIME, CBS, and ESPN special.

P.S. College basketball hall of fame also moves to Wichita.


T


...

The aac is looking at 6 million as its floor and 10-12 million max. The floor is set by primarily one entity purchasing the rights, 10-12 if we break it up and have multiple bids for each of the three tiers. Our basketball does add value but wont be a deciding factor. The nbe is the outlier here, not the norm. 1-2 million is basketball worth. The vast majority is based on football, which the aac has set itself up nicely with viewership and on field performance. Adding navy's inventory will also help. My guess is about 9 million.

The mwc has done nothing to improve its standing and several teams are on cruise control and happy to be at the bottom, they can expect a similar cusa/current deal with boise keeping its sweetheart set up. BYU will see a slight improvement because of their numbers and ability to get p5 opponents. The aac will come out smelling like roses because of the original low ball contract, numbers, and on field/court performance. This will look really bad for the the g4s, but half of the raise will be based on the now known return of the AAC.

(10-31-2017 11:27 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 11:18 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:41 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:00 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 09:49 AM)fanhood Wrote:  I understand you want what is "fair." I think we all all people, want what is fair in every aspect of life. Certainly, and unfortunately, that is not always the case.

This is certainly a sports related topic. Do you think the 7-10 million number is something that is attainable? If so, how so?

What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

All fair points here.

One thing to note, $7-10 million has been said here many times, and I have commented that that number is insane. People have then shouted me down. I think the Memphis President said the $10 million number as well. I just want to know if people here still think that is close to possible.

As always, I have said that ~$3 million is probably likely. $5 million would be a HUGE victory, and I would laud the AAC for it.

3 million is about as ridiculous as 10 million. CBS spends 12 million for a MW package that includes no Boise home games (which is the biggest MW TV draw). We know, even including Boise, AAC games draw more viewers than MW games. We also know CBS paid that 7 million for CUSA games--yet preferred to buy AAC games from ESPN over showing all the CUSA games they had purchased. Thus, we know CBS Sports is willing to pay more for the AAC than 7 million. CUSA didnt have USF, Cinci, UConn, Temple, or Navy in that old CBS deal. We also know CBS was paying seperately for Navy rights---so it should also be noted that the current AAC ESPN deal didnt include Navy for most years (those rights remained with CBS-Sports until after 2018).

Id also mention that AAC basketball, now with Wichita, UConn, Cinci, Temple, SMU, Memphis, etc is going to be a very attractive college basketball property. The BE gets 4 million a team just for basketball. I doubt we get that for basketball---but there is significant value in AAC basketball. Thats a lot of good winter inventory for a sports network.

So a moderate raise from ESPN for the games they actually show coupled with the ACC regaining their 2nd tier rights to sell to CBS (or NBC) will easily get the AAC to 4 million a team. Thats the rock bottom floor. The top depends on how aggressive the bidding gets. If NBC is involved (and I think they will be), things could get interesting.

We'll see. I hope you are right. I would laud anything at ~$5 million.

I am not convinced that basketball matters at all, but I don't know.

The AAC's contract will set the market, so I am uniquely interested here. If I recall, the AAC is prior to BYU's renewal, the MW, as well as the rest of the market, correct?

Given that the Big East gets 4 million a team and doesn't offer one single snap of football---I think that there is no longer much of a debate as to whether basketball can be a significant driver of value.

(10-31-2017 12:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 11:27 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 11:18 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:41 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(10-31-2017 10:00 AM)Bull Wrote:  What I mean by 'fair' is not any predetermined value... just an appropriate and legitimate assessment of market value of an 'intact conference' by working market forces.

Basically, when the AAC negotiated it's TV deal, it had just be ripped apart by realignment, and just replaced all the losses with new additions. Then we lost/sold the 'Big East' name, and didn't even have a new replacement name yet. Further, the entire world was speculating that we would continue to be ripped apart... and likely not survive. Yet ahead of the first season, we still needed a TV deal.

So, ESPN made us an absolutely ridiculous offer... and we had no recourse but to accept. What I mean by 'fair' is a now established (and named) AAC, with a few years of history and success. I want to see what 'THIS' AAC is offered... should be interesting.

Stop asking us to endorse 7-10 million... we don't have a crystal ball, and it sounds like you just want us to commit to a number so you can come back and gloat later. All we can do is win on the field, get our stadiums full as possible, get as many viewers as possible... then send our media shark Commissioner in to negotiate. We'll see what happens.

All fair points here.

One thing to note, $7-10 million has been said here many times, and I have commented that that number is insane. People have then shouted me down. I think the Memphis President said the $10 million number as well. I just want to know if people here still think that is close to possible.

As always, I have said that ~$3 million is probably likely. $5 million would be a HUGE victory, and I would laud the AAC for it.

3 million is about as ridiculous as 10 million. CBS spends 12 million for a MW package that includes no Boise home games (which is the biggest MW TV draw). We know, even including Boise, AAC games draw more viewers than MW games. We also know CBS paid that 7 million for CUSA games--yet preferred to buy AAC games from ESPN over showing all the CUSA games they had purchased. Thus, we know CBS Sports is willing to pay more for the AAC than 7 million. CUSA didnt have USF, Cinci, UConn, Temple, or Navy in that old CBS deal. We also know CBS was paying seperately for Navy rights---so it should also be noted that the current AAC ESPN deal didnt include Navy for most years (those rights remained with CBS-Sports until after 2018).

Id also mention that AAC basketball, now with Wichita, UConn, Cinci, Temple, SMU, Memphis, etc is going to be a very attractive college basketball property. The BE gets 4 million a team just for basketball. I doubt we get that for basketball---but there is significant value in AAC basketball. Thats a lot of good winter inventory for a sports network.

So a moderate raise from ESPN for the games they actually show coupled with the ACC regaining their 2nd tier rights to sell to CBS (or NBC) will easily get the AAC to 4 million a team. Thats the rock bottom floor. The top depends on how aggressive the bidding gets. If NBC is involved (and I think they will be), things could get interesting.

We'll see. I hope you are right. I would laud anything at ~$5 million.

I am not convinced that basketball matters at all, but I don't know.

The AAC's contract will set the market, so I am uniquely interested here. If I recall, the AAC is prior to BYU's renewal, the MW, as well as the rest of the market, correct?

Given that the Big East gets 4 million a team and doesn't offer one single snap of football---I think the there is no longer much of a debate as to whether basketball can be a significant driver of value.

True story. If non-football content is maxed out at $4 Mil and the football/basketball split is in the 70/30 or 80/20 range, then one could say the ceiling is quite high for an all-sports contract.

(10-31-2017 11:27 AM)fanhood Wrote:  We'll see. I hope you are right. I would laud anything at ~$5 million.

I am not convinced that basketball matters at all, but I don't know.

BYU makes about $500K million per year from the WCC's ESPN basketball deal.

(10-31-2017 11:27 AM)fanhood Wrote:  The AAC's contract will set the market, so I am uniquely interested here. If I recall, the AAC is prior to BYU's renewal, the MW, as well as the rest of the market, correct?

AAC, MWC, and BYU contracts are all up for renewal after the 2019 football season and 2019/2020 basketball season.

(10-30-2017 10:48 PM)namssa Wrote:  https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-...-football/

This article pretty much says it all. ESPN is a dead man walking. They are going the way of MTV and Blockbuster. They create no content only broadcast other people's content. They are a middle man the way blockbuster was. No need for ESPN once you can get the content through streaming and other sources.

ESPN is the production side, cable is the supply side. ESPN still owns the production and content. Not like Netflix can stream Penn St vs Ohio St without going through ESPN first.