Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)


Post Reply 
Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
RamblinRedWolf44 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,235
Joined: Feb 2014
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Arkansas StAte
Location:
Post: #1
Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
http://www.953theticket.com/?p=15667

Among the MANY MANY Topics Brad discussed with Tim Brando, Brando discussed how the midmajors are losing more and more footing against the power 5 and he felt the only way for G5 to be able to have some wiggle room with negotiating is for all the G5 conferences to unite as a single entity or "coalition" as TB put it, which much would make it much more difficult for the P5 leagues to just ignore the mid majors and make the overall politic position stronger

He also felt with the way the tv landscape is quickly imploding and getting filled up by the power 5 leagues, he felt that the best course was for the G5 to look towards "digital landscape" like Facebook and Twitter streaming
08-03-2016 12:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

rokamortis Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,736
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 47
I Root For: Coastal
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 12:48 PM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  http://www.953theticket.com/?p=15667

Among the MANY MANY Topics Brad discussed with Tim Brando, Brando discussed how the midmajors are losing more and more footing against the power 5 and he felt the only way for G5 to be able to have some wiggle room with negotiating is for all the G5 conferences to unite as a single entity or "coalition" as TB put it, which much would make it much more difficult for the P5 leagues to just ignore the mid majors and make the overall politic position stronger

He also felt with the way the tv landscape is quickly imploding and getting filled up by the power 5 leagues, he felt that the best course was for the G5 to look towards "digital landscape" like Facebook and Twitter streaming

I think a media rights coalition that can leverage a better bargaining position makes sense. Right now I think a formalized coalition for all other interests is probably not a good idea. Plus, getting all of the conferences on board is going to be rough as some are declaring themselves P6 or pretty much all members are fighting each other for an advantage to the holy land of P5.

I do think there should be some opportunity for digital streaming. I read an article about NetFlix that said they don't necessarily care about viewers / ratings but just that it keeps people interested enough to stay subscribing and attracting new subscribers. Although they don't seem to care as much about live streaming, I could envision a play into live sports especially if they'll archive the games.

Netflix will pay $100+ million for a new series ($120 mill for The Beatdown) ... so $25-$30+ million a year per conference from Netflix, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, etc. for all of a G5 conference's TV rights for all sports doesn't seem out of line - in fact it looks like a bargain with constant inventory nearly all year long. Plus, they could work out a deal with a traditional channel to show conference championships, a sponsored bowl game, etc.

Sure, it may not be P5 teams / games but I think they'll find enough interest to make it worth while.
08-03-2016 01:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 23,699
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 741
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
Got to all or really close to it in or it doesn't work. ESPN will just plug the void with someone not on board otherwise.
08-03-2016 01:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
trojanbrutha Offline
Beltbbs Troy Football INsider
*

Posts: 4,557
Joined: Nov 2007
Reputation: 78
I Root For: TROY
Location: Greenville, AL
Post: #4
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 12:48 PM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  http://www.953theticket.com/?p=15667

Among the MANY MANY Topics Brad discussed with Tim Brando, Brando discussed how the midmajors are losing more and more footing against the power 5 and he felt the only way for G5 to be able to have some wiggle room with negotiating is for all the G5 conferences to unite as a single entity or "coalition" as TB put it, which much would make it much more difficult for the P5 leagues to just ignore the mid majors and make the overall politic position stronger

He also felt with the way the tv landscape is quickly imploding and getting filled up by the power 5 leagues, he felt that the best course was for the G5 to look towards "digital landscape" like Facebook and Twitter streaming

Well, they were granted autonomy...and who voted for that?
08-03-2016 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrueBlueDrew Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,726
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 238
I Root For: Jawjuh Suthen
Location: Eagle Nation
Post: #5
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
Cable and cable packages are on their way out. In the future I could see people paying per channel that they wanted to add to their tv kind of like Netflix. Every channel would be downloadable like an app and you would pay a monthly membership fee for each channel.

Inside each channel app you can stream any shows or games that the channel is currently showing like with WatchESPN. This will cause a shift in what is important to belong to conferences because it will no longer matter what size market your school is in, but how many fans your school has and how many people want to watch your games and what kind of ratings your team can generate.

That would give advantages to schools like Georgia Southern and App and disadvantage schools like UNCC and Ga State. You might even see where tv deals transcend conference alignment and tv channels make deals with individual schools. And each school would be responsible for generating its own money through its TV deals based on the ratings it provides the channel. For instance, let's say 800,000 people tuned in to watch the App vs Georgia Southern game and 175,000 people tuned in to watch Ga State vs ULM, App and GS would receive more money because they had higher ratings.

This would drastically alter not only conference alignment, but bowl game scheduling, and picking the teams for the CFP. Suddenly bowls will want teams that will generate the most revenue on tv while also bringing a lot of people to the city to see the game live. Schools would be promoting themselves like crazy trying to build their fanbase. Let the bloodbath commence.

You heard it here first, folks.
08-03-2016 02:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

airtroop Offline
Sun Belt Nationalist
*

Posts: 2,087
Joined: Feb 2009
Reputation: 43
I Root For: South Alabama
Location: Mobile, AL
Post: #6
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
As for a G5 alliance, it'll never happen. Too many egotists fighting over one big bag of money? It'd get ugly on the first and only conference call between the 5 leagues.
08-03-2016 02:46 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 02:46 PM)airtroop Wrote:  As for a G5 alliance, it'll never happen. Too many egotists fighting over one big bag of money? It'd get ugly on the first and only conference call between the 5 leagues.

Back when the SEC, PAC, B12, B1G, ACC, Big East were getting 3 million per year deals and the MWC/CUSA were getting 1 million per school and good Thursday night ESPN2 slots it was not in their interest to cooperate with the MAC and SBC.

The AAC in its current contract has a little more money than the MAC and SBC but the TV slots are much better too. This could really change if they lose 3-4 schools. The TV contract will be cancelled or at the very least have its slots removed so they can show Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati as part of the B12 package.

If the AAC could grab 3 of the more valuable schools from CUSA (Rice, SoMiss and VCU) then do a coast-2-coast deal with the MWC and MAC since those markets aren't covered by the AAC then they might be onto something.
08-03-2016 05:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
runamuck Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,646
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 21
I Root For: uta
Location: DFW
Post: #8
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 05:06 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 02:46 PM)airtroop Wrote:  As for a G5 alliance, it'll never happen. Too many egotists fighting over one big bag of money? It'd get ugly on the first and only conference call between the 5 leagues.

Back when the SEC, PAC, B12, B1G, ACC, Big East were getting 3 million per year deals and the MWC/CUSA were getting 1 million per school and good Thursday night ESPN2 slots it was not in their interest to cooperate with the MAC and SBC.

The AAC in its current contract has a little more money than the MAC and SBC but the TV slots are much better too. This could really change if they lose 3-4 schools. The TV contract will be cancelled or at the very least have its slots removed so they can show Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati as part of the B12 package.

If the AAC could grab 3 of the more valuable schools from CUSA (Rice, SoMiss and VCU) then do a coast-2-coast deal with the MWC and MAC since those markets aren't covered by the AAC then they might be onto something.

The fact is the group of top schools is never going to include everybody. the big eaters are actually increasing the gap. even tho g5 schools have better and better facilities and spend more money than they used to, the top level is a moving target and there is never going to be parity. the only way g5's are competitive is because of scholarship limits nowadays the bigs cant sign all the talent that is available. If the number of fbs schools stays the same the leftovers we can pick from becomes a larger pool. If we ever get close, the bigs will just tell the ncaa to take a hike and form their own deal. they have mentioned that option before to get the ncaa to cave on stuff.
08-03-2016 07:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AppState87 Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 32
Joined: Sep 2015
Reputation: 2
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
I think there's some merit to try to form a coalition among the G-5. Egos aside, we are all pretty much in the same boat and face the same issues. I personally see the CFP expanding from 4 to 8 teams in another 3-5 years. The money to be had is simply going to be too large to ignore. G5 schools need a unified voice with respect to playoff access and a share of the proceeds from an expanded field.
08-03-2016 08:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 08:19 PM)AppState87 Wrote:  I think there's some merit to try to form a coalition among the G-5. Egos aside, we are all pretty much in the same boat and face the same issues. I personally see the CFP expanding from 4 to 8 teams in another 3-5 years. The money to be had is simply going to be too large to ignore. G5 schools need a unified voice with respect to playoff access and a share of the proceeds from an expanded field.

There may not be more money on the table in 2-4 years.

Network profit margins are declining. Attendance is on its way down, especially at P5 schools where they've nuked traditional rivalries in favor of multi-region power conferences. There are 32 schools in a P5 that will finish in the second division in 2016.

I think its time for every G5 conference champion to finish the season playing in an access bowl. If they will up the money to the G5 by another 100 million they need to bring access bowls with.
08-03-2016 08:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Kittonhead Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2013
Reputation: 119
I Root For: Beat Matisse
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 07:05 PM)runamuck Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 05:06 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 02:46 PM)airtroop Wrote:  As for a G5 alliance, it'll never happen. Too many egotists fighting over one big bag of money? It'd get ugly on the first and only conference call between the 5 leagues.

Back when the SEC, PAC, B12, B1G, ACC, Big East were getting 3 million per year deals and the MWC/CUSA were getting 1 million per school and good Thursday night ESPN2 slots it was not in their interest to cooperate with the MAC and SBC.

The AAC in its current contract has a little more money than the MAC and SBC but the TV slots are much better too. This could really change if they lose 3-4 schools. The TV contract will be cancelled or at the very least have its slots removed so they can show Houston, Memphis, Cincinnati as part of the B12 package.

If the AAC could grab 3 of the more valuable schools from CUSA (Rice, SoMiss and VCU) then do a coast-2-coast deal with the MWC and MAC since those markets aren't covered by the AAC then they might be onto something.

The fact is the group of top schools is never going to include everybody. the big eaters are actually increasing the gap. even tho g5 schools have better and better facilities and spend more money than they used to, the top level is a moving target and there is never going to be parity. the only way g5's are competitive is because of scholarship limits nowadays the bigs cant sign all the talent that is available. If the number of fbs schools stays the same the leftovers we can pick from becomes a larger pool. If we ever get close, the bigs will just tell the ncaa to take a hike and form their own deal. they have mentioned that option before to get the ncaa to cave on stuff.

The thing is with facilities a school can only have one indoor practice facility, one jumbotron and one football operations building.

Most of the G5 programs didn't have any of that 10 year ago. Now most of them do.

You've got P5 programs like WVU and Pittsburgh that were at one time important in BCS conferences but now afterthoughts in P5's. They'll lose players out on the recruiting trail to schools with 8-10 wins out of a G5 conference.

I think its more the committee BS where the opinions of P5 supporters ensure that any G5 schedule isn't respected. I mean any G5 schedule even one where the conference is having a great year with multiple Top 25 teams and they played an excellent non conference schedule featuring ranked opponents. Its way worse than the BCS in this regard.
08-03-2016 09:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
EigenEagle Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,584
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 241
I Root For: Ga Southern
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
The AAC will be fine even if they lose a couple of teams and will still have more valuable media rights than the rest of us. They expanded a lot more smartly than CUSA did. They don't need any of the other G5 leagues.
(This post was last modified: 08-03-2016 09:51 PM by EigenEagle.)
08-03-2016 09:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 30,154
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1335
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
What the G5 really need to do is add context to their conference races. Right now, there is only one team going anywhere (the access bowl). So the champs of the other 4 conferences become irrelevant. If there were a major bowl slot waiting for the each G5 winner---well, now those conference races mean something (because the champ will be in Pepsi Bowl against a high finishing P5 team). Figure out a way to make that happen and G5 football becomes more interesting to the casual fan.....which means much of the income gap will eventually disappear on its own.

As for a G5 TV consortium---it wont happen. It was used by the P5 for a while (the CFA or College Football Association), but it collapsed once one conference decided they could make more money on their own. In fact its collapse was really the trigger for the modern era of college realignment that we know today. As mention above, I could see a G5 major bowl consortium where we used some of the G5 college playoff money to fund 3 bowls with high enough payouts to attract high selections for P5 conferences (maybe rotating slots so no single P5 has to play a G5 champ every year).

Top G5 champ goes to the access bowl.
#2 G5 champ goes to a G5 owned bowl vs a high P5 selection.
#3 G5 champ goes to a G5 owned bowl vs a high P5 selection
#4 and #5 G5 champs pay each other in a G5 owned bowl.

Every champ has a major bowl destination.
(This post was last modified: 08-03-2016 10:07 PM by Attackcoog.)
08-03-2016 09:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

FIU4Ever Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 2,461
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 142
I Root For: FIU
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 02:23 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Cable and cable packages are on their way out. In the future I could see people paying per channel that they wanted to add to their tv kind of like Netflix. Every channel would be downloadable like an app and you would pay a monthly membership fee for each channel.

Inside each channel app you can stream any shows or games that the channel is currently showing like with WatchESPN. This will cause a shift in what is important to belong to conferences because it will no longer matter what size market your school is in, but how many fans your school has and how many people want to watch your games and what kind of ratings your team can generate.

That would give advantages to schools like Georgia Southern and App and disadvantage schools like UNCC and Ga State. You might even see where tv deals transcend conference alignment and tv channels make deals with individual schools. And each school would be responsible for generating its own money through its TV deals based on the ratings it provides the channel. For instance, let's say 800,000 people tuned in to watch the App vs Georgia Southern game and 175,000 people tuned in to watch Ga State vs ULM, App and GS would receive more money because they had higher ratings.

This would drastically alter not only conference alignment, but bowl game scheduling, and picking the teams for the CFP. Suddenly bowls will want teams that will generate the most revenue on tv while also bringing a lot of people to the city to see the game live. Schools would be promoting themselves like crazy trying to build their fanbase. Let the bloodbath commence.

You heard it here first, folks.

App State vs Ga Sou had 190k viewers on ESPNU channel. For comparison, UGA vs Ga Sou had 954k viewers on ESPNU channel, UGA vs Ga. Tech was just over 1M viewers & UNCC vs Ga State was 174k viewers. What are the numbers you are using to extrapolate a 400% increase in viewership (especially if it is a non ESPN platform) for App/Ga. Sou vs 1% increase for Ga. State/ULM?

If we are looking at a non traditional platform, I would give the advantage to a Ga State in your scenario. Just like parking in a metro university where you pay for it even if you don't have a car, the students could vote to bundle subscription to the channel in gym fees. Let's say 40k students @ $50 per year per student = $2M. Alumni Assoc gets creative with marketing to a 200k pool, even more gets added.

All hypothetical, but if you had a company look at a business proposal with a guaranteed income stream vs one that is based on getting a 400% (and let's be honest, that was not 190k App & Ga Sou fans ) increase in viewership to be feasible, which would you go with?
08-04-2016 11:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TrueBlueDrew Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,726
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 238
I Root For: Jawjuh Suthen
Location: Eagle Nation
Post: #15
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-04-2016 11:00 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 02:23 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Cable and cable packages are on their way out. In the future I could see people paying per channel that they wanted to add to their tv kind of like Netflix. Every channel would be downloadable like an app and you would pay a monthly membership fee for each channel.

Inside each channel app you can stream any shows or games that the channel is currently showing like with WatchESPN. This will cause a shift in what is important to belong to conferences because it will no longer matter what size market your school is in, but how many fans your school has and how many people want to watch your games and what kind of ratings your team can generate.

That would give advantages to schools like Georgia Southern and App and disadvantage schools like UNCC and Ga State. You might even see where tv deals transcend conference alignment and tv channels make deals with individual schools. And each school would be responsible for generating its own money through its TV deals based on the ratings it provides the channel. For instance, let's say 800,000 people tuned in to watch the App vs Georgia Southern game and 175,000 people tuned in to watch Ga State vs ULM, App and GS would receive more money because they had higher ratings.

This would drastically alter not only conference alignment, but bowl game scheduling, and picking the teams for the CFP. Suddenly bowls will want teams that will generate the most revenue on tv while also bringing a lot of people to the city to see the game live. Schools would be promoting themselves like crazy trying to build their fanbase. Let the bloodbath commence.

You heard it here first, folks.

App State vs Ga Sou had 190k viewers on ESPNU channel. For comparison, UGA vs Ga Sou had 954k viewers on ESPNU channel, UGA vs Ga. Tech was just over 1M viewers & UNCC vs Ga State was 174k viewers. What are the numbers you are using to extrapolate a 400% increase in viewership (especially if it is a non ESPN platform) for App/Ga. Sou vs 1% increase for Ga. State/ULM?

If we are looking at a non traditional platform, I would give the advantage to a Ga State in your scenario. Just like parking in a metro university where you pay for it even if you don't have a car, the students could vote to bundle subscription to the channel in gym fees. Let's say 40k students @ $50 per year per student = $2M. Alumni Assoc gets creative with marketing to a 200k pool, even more gets added.

All hypothetical, but if you had a company look at a business proposal with a guaranteed income stream vs one that is based on getting a 400% (and let's be honest, that was not 190k App & Ga Sou fans ) increase in viewership to be feasible, which would you go with?

This all takes place in the future. Maybe 10 years from now. I'm not expecting our game with App to have 800k viewers this coming season or anything.

Also it sounds like you are saying that schools with larger student populations would benefit because they could charge students to watch games through student fees which isn't what I proposed.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2016 11:18 AM by TrueBlueDrew.)
08-04-2016 11:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
FIU4Ever Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 2,461
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 142
I Root For: FIU
Location:
Post: #16
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-04-2016 11:12 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  
(08-04-2016 11:00 AM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 02:23 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Cable and cable packages are on their way out. In the future I could see people paying per channel that they wanted to add to their tv kind of like Netflix. Every channel would be downloadable like an app and you would pay a monthly membership fee for each channel.

Inside each channel app you can stream any shows or games that the channel is currently showing like with WatchESPN. This will cause a shift in what is important to belong to conferences because it will no longer matter what size market your school is in, but how many fans your school has and how many people want to watch your games and what kind of ratings your team can generate.

That would give advantages to schools like Georgia Southern and App and disadvantage schools like UNCC and Ga State. You might even see where tv deals transcend conference alignment and tv channels make deals with individual schools. And each school would be responsible for generating its own money through its TV deals based on the ratings it provides the channel. For instance, let's say 800,000 people tuned in to watch the App vs Georgia Southern game and 175,000 people tuned in to watch Ga State vs ULM, App and GS would receive more money because they had higher ratings.

This would drastically alter not only conference alignment, but bowl game scheduling, and picking the teams for the CFP. Suddenly bowls will want teams that will generate the most revenue on tv while also bringing a lot of people to the city to see the game live. Schools would be promoting themselves like crazy trying to build their fanbase. Let the bloodbath commence.

You heard it here first, folks.

App State vs Ga Sou had 190k viewers on ESPNU channel. For comparison, UGA vs Ga Sou had 954k viewers on ESPNU channel, UGA vs Ga. Tech was just over 1M viewers & UNCC vs Ga State was 174k viewers. What are the numbers you are using to extrapolate a 400% increase in viewership (especially if it is a non ESPN platform) for App/Ga. Sou vs 1% increase for Ga. State/ULM?

If we are looking at a non traditional platform, I would give the advantage to a Ga State in your scenario. Just like parking in a metro university where you pay for it even if you don't have a car, the students could vote to bundle subscription to the channel in gym fees. Let's say 40k students @ $50 per year per student = $2M. Alumni Assoc gets creative with marketing to a 200k pool, even more gets added.

All hypothetical, but if you had a company look at a business proposal with a guaranteed income stream vs one that is based on getting a 400% (and let's be honest, that was not 190k App & Ga Sou fans ) increase in viewership to be feasible, which would you go with?

This all takes place in the future. Maybe 5-10 years from now. I'm not expecting our game with App to have 800k viewers this coming season or anything.

You had 954k against the 'dawgs, on a saturday, an SEC team, in-state rival and the premier program in the state. App/Ga. Sou was a mid week game, only game on TV. What is gonna happen in 5-10 years to make App/Ga Sou a bigger draw than UGA/Ga Sou? And why would that "whatever" not also improve the viewership for a Ga State/ULM?
08-04-2016 11:23 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JCGSU Offline
HAIL SOUTHERN
*

Posts: 4,280
Joined: Aug 2009
Reputation: 71
I Root For: GS EAGLES
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-03-2016 12:48 PM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  http://www.953theticket.com/?p=15667

Among the MANY MANY Topics Brad discussed with Tim Brando, Brando discussed how the midmajors are losing more and more footing against the power 5 and he felt the only way for G5 to be able to have some wiggle room with negotiating is for all the G5 conferences to unite as a single entity or "coalition" as TB put it, which much would make it much more difficult for the P5 leagues to just ignore the mid majors and make the overall politic position stronger

He also felt with the way the tv landscape is quickly imploding and getting filled up by the power 5 leagues, he felt that the best course was for the G5 to look towards "digital landscape" like Facebook and Twitter streaming

I have no problem with schooll like Alabama getting everything they deserve it is the other half of the P5 that does not or even come close to pulling their own weight like Vandy / Wake Forest getting an unfair competitive advantage over teams as good as Houston was last year in recruiting and money. Makes me sick Vandy and Wake gets as much as AL or FSU do while they continually get their teeth kicked in by the G5.
Having said that there are way to many G5's that have been at this level for decades if not always DIV IA / FBS that have done little to or just cant improve even before the BCS era.
Some teams really are really not in good situations to ever be consistently competitive in the P5 and or G5. If I went to a FCS college in the NE with existing multiple FBS teams in state I would have never been in favor in moving up but these things still happen. There is a reason UMASS can be a basketball power and suck at the FBS level in football. Location, interest, local available talent matter just as much as budget and market.
(This post was last modified: 08-04-2016 11:36 AM by JCGSU.)
08-04-2016 11:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply

FIU4Ever Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 2,461
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 142
I Root For: FIU
Location:
Post: #18
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
(08-04-2016 11:12 AM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 02:23 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Cable and cable packages are on their way out. In the future I could see people paying per channel that they wanted to add to their tv kind of like Netflix. Every channel would be downloadable like an app and you would pay a monthly membership fee for each channel.

Also it sounds like you are saying that schools with larger student populations would benefit because they could charge students to watch games through student fees which isn't what I proposed.

You did mention downloadable apps/channel. Someone must pay for the content, right? We pay for ESPN platform and we get essentially all 10 conferences. If we go a la carte, your average joe has to have a dog in the fight or he is not gonna pay for that specific school/conference channel.
08-04-2016 11:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AlwaysSunny Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 707
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 16
I Root For: NCAA
Location:
Post: #19
RE: Discussion Wednesday: Group of 5 Coalition?
Neither the MWC nor the AAC would have any reason to ever go for this. And as it stands neither does the MAC.
08-04-2016 11:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2019 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, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.