Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
Author Message
BeliefBlazer Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 13,628
Joined: Jun 2004
Reputation: 278
I Root For: UAB
Location: Portal, GA

DonatorsDonators
Post: #21
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:34 PM)stever20 Wrote:  thing that could be interesting-
say CUSA goes 16 and finishes 4th. Say they get 2.5 million.
SBC goes 12(picks up 2 more FCS schools) and finishes 5th. They get 1.5 million extra.
CUSA 14.5 million, 16 schools- 906k per school
SBC 13.5 million, 12 schools- 1,125k per school

For CUSA to just match SBC, they would need to finish at least #2 of the 5 conferences, and more likely #1. Even if they remain at 14, they would need 3.75 million from the group 2 money, which would probably be #3 type money.

The $6 million for having the highest ranked team will be split with conference mates in every conference other than the MWC. If an MAC/AAC/SBC team made it the payout difference would be even larger over CUSA.
04-10-2013 01:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HuskieTap22 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,981
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 25
I Root For: NIU Huskies
Location:
Post: #22
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
So what happens if a league can't get to twelve members? Where does the difference between $12million - X $million per league team end up? Divided equally between the four conference with 12?
04-10-2013 01:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #23
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:44 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So what happens if a league can't get to twelve members? Where does the difference between $12million - X $million per league team end up? Divided equally between the four conference with 12?

03-confused The article doesn't say anything about requiring 12 members. The payout is guaranteed at $1,000,000 per member, period, unless your conference has more than 12. At that point you're reducing your payout per school.
(This post was last modified: 04-10-2013 01:52 PM by blunderbuss.)
04-10-2013 01:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HuskieTap22 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,981
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 25
I Root For: NIU Huskies
Location:
Post: #24
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:49 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:44 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So what happens if a league can't get to twelve members? Where does the difference between $12million - X $million per league team end up? Divided equally between the four conference with 12?

03-confused The article doesn't say anything about requiring 12 members. The payout is guaranteed at $1,000,000 per member, period, unless your conference has more than 12. At that point you're reducing your payout per school.

Yeah but $60 million divided by 5 is $12million per conference max. But if the payout is $1 million per team and your league only has 10 members, what happens to the additional $2 million (12 - 10)?
04-10-2013 01:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 24,077
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 767
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #25
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
Gee seems like I pointed this out weeks ago that going to 12 wasn't going to increase the per team dollars for the current SBC teams.

Basically what has happened boys and girls is this.

We have added App and GaSo because they give us security at 10 full members and hopefully translate their FCS success into FBS success to make the Sun Belt a contender for the CFP performance based dollars.

We have thrown NMSU and Idaho a bone to stay alive (some CFP cash + scheduling) but we are trimming some of the meat off that bone (travel subsidy) and hope that the title game gives us either some decent TV dollars or leads to renegotiating our TV deals to be more favorable.

The Sun Belt has pulled NMSU and Idaho out of the pit with the lions and gladiators to help get some TV leverage because we can do it without it costing us any money. (We were getting a million a team anyway so we take the extra to 12 then take some of it back for travel).
04-10-2013 01:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 36,827
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 370
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #26
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:40 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:34 PM)stever20 Wrote:  thing that could be interesting-
say CUSA goes 16 and finishes 4th. Say they get 2.5 million.
SBC goes 12(picks up 2 more FCS schools) and finishes 5th. They get 1.5 million extra.
CUSA 14.5 million, 16 schools- 906k per school
SBC 13.5 million, 12 schools- 1,125k per school

For CUSA to just match SBC, they would need to finish at least #2 of the 5 conferences, and more likely #1. Even if they remain at 14, they would need 3.75 million from the group 2 money, which would probably be #3 type money.

True..but keep in mind that CUSA's TV contract is much better than the SBC and by relegating the SBC to programs in Boone and Savannah over say Charlotte and Norfolk...they will always get more TV money. In short, it may pay in other ways (TV) that more than offsets the loss in per team revenue from the BCS.

It was, but it will almost certainly get reduced in a few years. As is, it's 14 million for 14 teams now. So 1 million per school.

If CUSA goes 16-
BCS 14.5 mil plus 14 mil tv= 28.5 mil/16 teams- 1.78 mil per year
SBC
BCS 13.5 mil plus say 5 mil tv= 18.5 mil/12 teams- 1.54 mil per year

hardly a huge gap there.
04-10-2013 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BullsFanInTX Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 9,197
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 230
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #27
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:26 PM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:20 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So is this why the Sun Belt is so adamant on getting to 12 teams? To maximize the payout?

Seems it gave them a reason to add the two FB only members...which is probably a good thing overall.

At this point adding App State and Ga Southern hasn't really diluted the FBS ...and most of the other adds to FBS (Ga State, UTSA, USA, Texas State, ODU and Charlotte) appear to serious about being competitive from a monetary standpoint. But how many new schools can be added without serious dilution of the quality of programs at the lower levels. That will be at least 8 new schools added in less than a five year period.

You forgot about UMass as well. So 9 new schools added in less than a five year period, and 2 more could be on the way if CUSA goes to 16 for some reason.

3 more. If CUSA goes to 16, the Sun Belt will need to add 3 teams to get to 12. Currently they have 11.
04-10-2013 02:03 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,173
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 157
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #28
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
Well, if the article still holds true then my answer regarding the Access Bowl payout or Playoff payout is answered. The $6 million goes to the conference who is represented at the Access bowl or playoff spot.

The amount is included in the $86+ million and is not separate.

I had hoped that the Access bowl money was separate for the Go5 as I thought the $86 million is from the playoff $$ and not from the bowl $$.
(This post was last modified: 04-10-2013 02:05 PM by MWC Tex.)
04-10-2013 02:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrEvilGuapo Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 122
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 13
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: Alabama
Post: #29
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:24 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Sounds like there would be very little incentive for CUSA to go to 16 teams. It would simply dilute their pie further.

That cap also removes any incentive for the Mountain West or the American to expand beyond 12 football teams.

And maybe the CUSA presidents should be asking Banowsky, "Tell us again why you pushed us to expand to 14 teams instead of just 12?"

The decision by C-USA to go to 14 was made before the revenue distribution discussions had even started. The intention was to protect itself from further raids, allowing for the loss of 2 schools without the need to necessarily react. Those raids ended up happening sooner than expected and in higher magnitude than expected, so C-USA has continued to back-fill the 14-team model.

That said, going to 16 would be foolish as they do now have a priori knowledge of the revenue distribution consequences.
04-10-2013 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,022
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 158
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #30
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:20 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So is this why the Sun Belt is so adamant on getting to 12 teams? To maximize the payout?
And get to a Conference Championship Game.
04-10-2013 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrEvilGuapo Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 122
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 13
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: Alabama
Post: #31
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:54 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:49 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:44 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So what happens if a league can't get to twelve members? Where does the difference between $12million - X $million per league team end up? Divided equally between the four conference with 12?

03-confused The article doesn't say anything about requiring 12 members. The payout is guaranteed at $1,000,000 per member, period, unless your conference has more than 12. At that point you're reducing your payout per school.

Yeah but $60 million divided by 5 is $12million per conference max. But if the payout is $1 million per team and your league only has 10 members, what happens to the additional $2 million (12 - 10)?

I was told by someone in a Gof5 athletic department (verified by another) that any such additional money would go into Pool B.
04-10-2013 02:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 174
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #32
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
Going back to the overall revenue formula, something doesn't add up.

Of the $470M of revenue for the playoff, $125M comes off the top for:
APR - $300K/school = $39M
Independents - $200K/school + $4M for Notre Dame = $4.4M
FCS = $2M
Travel expenses for participants = ??
Expenses for BCS organization = ??
Appearance Bonuses for participants - $6M/school for semis and access spots = $36M

That leaves $43.6M for the travel expenses for the participants and the expenses of the BCS. Isn't that a little high for those two categories?
04-10-2013 02:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 36,827
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 370
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #33
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
just thought of this...

lets say CUSA goes to 16.

Then say UConn/Cincy get called up to the big 5....

CUSA being at 16 is going to make schools WANT to jump to the AAC.. Get 250k more right off the top before any TV difference. It's like CUSA is signing it's own death certificate by being at 16.
04-10-2013 02:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,022
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 158
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #34
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 01:57 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  The Sun Belt has pulled NMSU and Idaho out of the pit with the lions and gladiators to help get some TV leverage because we can do it without it costing us any money. (We were getting a million a team anyway so we take the extra to 12 then take some of it back for travel).
But remember that the Sunbelt needs eight full FBS members to be a Div1 conference. NMSU and Idaho FB-only starting in 2013 keeps the clock from starting to tick in 2013, and when WKY leaves, the clock only ticks for one month until Georgia State and Texas State finish their reclassification, August 1 2014. Indeed, the Sunbelt could have one more loss without its FBS eligibility being in danger.

With the FCS transitioning schools, its a big safety margin to have the two year grace period not start ticking until 2014. If you find out in June of one year that a school will be going next July, its already too late for an FCS school to be invited and complete its transition to replace that school inside the grace period.
04-10-2013 02:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HuskieTap22 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,981
Joined: Sep 2004
Reputation: 25
I Root For: NIU Huskies
Location:
Post: #35
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 02:11 PM)DrEvilGuapo Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:54 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:49 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:44 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  So what happens if a league can't get to twelve members? Where does the difference between $12million - X $million per league team end up? Divided equally between the four conference with 12?

03-confused The article doesn't say anything about requiring 12 members. The payout is guaranteed at $1,000,000 per member, period, unless your conference has more than 12. At that point you're reducing your payout per school.

Yeah but $60 million divided by 5 is $12million per conference max. But if the payout is $1 million per team and your league only has 10 members, what happens to the additional $2 million (12 - 10)?

I was told by someone in a Gof5 athletic department (verified by another) that any such additional money would go into Pool B.

That makes sense since presumably the Sun Belt would be the low league most years and not having realized the full potential of a 12 team payout would put more money into the hands of the other leagues. That would seems why they are pushing so hard to get to 12.
04-10-2013 02:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 16,128
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 650
I Root For: California
Location: TROS
Post: #36
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 02:09 PM)DrEvilGuapo Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:24 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Sounds like there would be very little incentive for CUSA to go to 16 teams. It would simply dilute their pie further.

That cap also removes any incentive for the Mountain West or the American to expand beyond 12 football teams.

And maybe the CUSA presidents should be asking Banowsky, "Tell us again why you pushed us to expand to 14 teams instead of just 12?"

The decision by C-USA to go to 14 was made before the revenue distribution discussions had even started. The intention was to protect itself from further raids, allowing for the loss of 2 schools without the need to necessarily react.

Every team above 12 that CUSA added would have still been available to them if they were raided and needed to reload to get back up to 12. There was no point in adding a 13th and 14th team before being raided.
04-10-2013 02:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stever20 Online
Legend
*

Posts: 36,827
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 370
I Root For: College Sports
Location:
Post: #37
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 02:14 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Going back to the overall revenue formula, something doesn't add up.

Of the $470M of revenue for the playoff, $125M comes off the top for:
APR - $300K/school = $39M
Independents - $200K/school + $4M for Notre Dame = $4.4M
FCS = $2M
Travel expenses for participants = ??
Expenses for BCS organization = ??
Appearance Bonuses for participants - $6M/school for semis and access spots = $36M

That leaves $43.6M for the travel expenses for the participants and the expenses of the BCS. Isn't that a little high for those two categories?
I'd kind of guess it'd be say 2-3 mil per team per game for travel expenses. If it's 3 mil, times 8, that's 24 million right there(remember 2 teams will play 2 games). 20 million for expenses of BCS?? I don't know.
04-10-2013 02:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrEvilGuapo Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 122
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 13
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: Alabama
Post: #38
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
One other interesting point I should share based on what I've heard. This little tidbit may explain why C-USA is even entertaining the 16-team model.

As has been discussed (correctly) in this thread, a conference is allocated $1 million per member school up to a $12 million maximum.

It is the discretion of the conference how to allocate that money internally. At least two Gof5 conferences (C-USA and MWC) are discussing the possibility of performance-based distributions of that money within the conference.

I doubt either decides to do so as it sets a bad precedent for membership harmony. Moreover, it would behoove the MWC (especially) to share this revenue equally as there is already inequity in their television revenue sharing model.
04-10-2013 02:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CommuterBob Offline
Head Tailgater
*

Posts: 5,840
Joined: Feb 2012
Reputation: 174
I Root For: UCF, Ohio State
Location:
Post: #39
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
Also remember that this is a Dennis Dodd article. Math is not his strong suit. He makes lots of errors regarding dollar amounts.
04-10-2013 02:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DrEvilGuapo Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 122
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 13
I Root For: East Carolina
Location: Alabama
Post: #40
RE: sounds like Idaho's AD was WRONG
(04-10-2013 02:19 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 02:09 PM)DrEvilGuapo Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:32 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(04-10-2013 01:24 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Sounds like there would be very little incentive for CUSA to go to 16 teams. It would simply dilute their pie further.

That cap also removes any incentive for the Mountain West or the American to expand beyond 12 football teams.

And maybe the CUSA presidents should be asking Banowsky, "Tell us again why you pushed us to expand to 14 teams instead of just 12?"

The decision by C-USA to go to 14 was made before the revenue distribution discussions had even started. The intention was to protect itself from further raids, allowing for the loss of 2 schools without the need to necessarily react.

Every team above 12 that CUSA added would have still been available to them if they were raided and needed to reload to get back up to 12. There was no point in adding a 13th and 14th team before being raided.

The intent was to increase the profile of all schools simultaneously so that a loss of 2 schools wouldn't necessarily require the 'promotion' of schools. It was a decision driven by the desire to create long-term stability and strength while also creating a more geographically friendly alignment.

It made sense at the time.
04-10-2013 02:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.