(04-19-2017 07:40 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  I don't think any of us has any idea what we will get. I think it will be a sizeable raise. What does that mean? I have no idea.
I think anywhere between 3 and 8 mil per school is possible, with the lower end of that being most likely.

I think we will see a contract that starts at 4 million per school and ends upwards to 7 to 8 million per school over a 12 year period with ESPN. Similar TV exposure as the current contract.

50 to 60 million in year one of the new deal and about 80 to 90 million at the end of the deal. I think might see something that also helps with the bowl games and non-conference scheduling.

I would prefer to see the conference renew with ESPN next year and try to get a deal with these type of numbers.

(04-19-2017 07:34 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Espn is now in a situation that they can't lose the AAC. The conference networks have shifted some content off the espn, espn2, espnu, etc channels. I don't think we will be happy but I'm guessing the number is around $3.5 million to max out at $4 million with guaranteed exposure.

If we can get ncaa credits, the league will make enough to survive.

That means most AAC schools would be losing about a million in revenue (when the realignment fund money is considered) and UConn, USF, and Cinci would be losing about 6 million a year. I'm not sure the AAC would survive in its current form if the payout is just 3.5-4. That might cost us just UConn---there might be more drastic moves to organize the G5 more regionally, or the AAC itself might expand in size and go to schedules that largely have teams only playing games within the division (thus even vastly cutting costs). I think we probably do survive with a contract at that level---but I think there would be some significant changes.

(04-19-2017 07:52 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:27 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:07 PM)AGuyIn_Water Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:03 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:01 PM)AGuyIn_Water Wrote:  American will get a pay day.

There is no similarities between MWC and AAC:

a. We have Houston, phi slamma jamma
b. We have Memphis which went to 2008 National Championship game in Basketball
c. USF? really good football school in American East for the upcoming season with Coach Strong.
d. UCF. 2014 Fiesta Bowl Champion. 2 time AAC Champion. 10,000 showed up for NIT Quarterfinal. UCF will have good roster for a possible 2018 NCAA berth.
e. UConn? Cincy? Oh boy, how about Navy?
f. Tulsa, a good basketball tradition and competitive football school.
g. SMU? East Carolina? Great Upside

If you put any of these teams in MWC, all those schools could bolster MWC lineup.

And I recently thought about western wing for American Conference. BYU? Boise? Air Force? San Diego State College? Great marker and NCAA level teams in Basketball.

OmG.

Can you explain your MWC lineup? I am intereted

Why try? Nobody can compete with your "everything is awesome....it is fun when you're part of a team" outlook. SDSU does have Don Coryell though, and that is about as relevant as your Phi Slamma Jamma reference.

Fanhood you are the most jealous poster on these boards.The AAC is head and shoulders above the MWC. The MWC is even talking about pulling out of their relationship with ESPN because the money may not be worth the time slots they have been given for tv. AAC has positioned itself for a good payday.

Aresco added Witcha State with the blessing of ESPN. ESPN is going to pay decent money for the AAC. If you don't like it tough.Your bitter rants will not change this reality.

This made me smile. Jealous? Of what?

I would be jealous if you had something that the MW doesn't currently have. If the AAC did actually get a $5 million dollar a year per team TV contract, yes I would then be jealous. Until then, I will continue to laugh at your myopia, and predict you get a nominal increase in TV revenue.

(04-19-2017 07:34 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Espn is now in a situation that they can't lose the AAC. The conference networks have shifted some content off the espn, espn2, espnu, etc channels. I don't think we will be happy but I'm guessing the number is around $3.5 million to max out at $4 million with guaranteed exposure.

If we can get ncaa credits, the league will make enough to survive.

I'm so tired of hearing this asinine 3.5mil stuff,lol. Heck the Army-Navy game is worth more than that alone, Uconn w bball is worth more than that alone. There's no way anyone that has objectively looked over the college landscape the past few years can assume that our entire conference sports packages are worth less than nbe bball especially considering our ratings in football. What we're going to see is a market correction similar to a stock market correction after a bad day which is what we basically had when our last contract was gutted due to uncontrollable realignment forces and instability. By hitting the free market and breaking up our packages we'll get somewhere near the last big East offer, trust that because the numbers are there. Our last deal was go away and die money, but now the AAC is the only chance for decent content with recognizable brands available. This next deal should push us past the being "the best g5" to the official "tweener" conference

Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

Why are you so obsessed, fangood?
You have no credentials that you've let on to support that you have relevant insight into television valuations. You want to poo poo ratings markers that have driven the industry. You offer no data or intelligent analysis. You just pick a number out of the air that suits the position of your favorite conference the MWC. Lol.

The bigger question is whether we maintained the matching aspect of the contract. If so, it will be a bad deal for the AAC. We need to have the bidding parties be able to make counter offers, otherwise ESPN will just sit back and match whatever low ball offer NBC/FOX/CBS makes.

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

TMK, and as I said in my last post this is key, NBC made an offer and ESPN simply matched it. There was no contractual right for NBC to counter.

(04-19-2017 08:33 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 07:52 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:27 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:07 PM)AGuyIn_Water Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:03 PM)fanhood Wrote:  OmG.

Can you explain your MWC lineup? I am intereted

Why try? Nobody can compete with your "everything is awesome....it is fun when you're part of a team" outlook. SDSU does have Don Coryell though, and that is about as relevant as your Phi Slamma Jamma reference.

Fanhood you are the most jealous poster on these boards.The AAC is head and shoulders above the MWC. The MWC is even talking about pulling out of their relationship with ESPN because the money may not be worth the time slots they have been given for tv. AAC has positioned itself for a good payday.

Aresco added Witcha State with the blessing of ESPN. ESPN is going to pay decent money for the AAC. If you don't like it tough.Your bitter rants will not change this reality.

This made me smile. Jealous?

I would be jealous if you had something that the MW doesn't currently have. If the AAC did actually get a $5 million dollar a year per team TV contract, yes I would then be jealous. Until then, I will continue to laugh at your myopia, and predict you get a nominal increase in TV revenue.

This proves what I just said. Your sole basis for your opinion is that it doesnt significantly exceed what the MWC gets...... Even though the AAC has been building a following on ESPN all these years, and winning at a clip to make it relevant in all-sports. It also has better brands in the money sports, in highly populated areas on the country.
The MWC has slipped into the abyss. Mediocre football. Terrible basketball and olympics. Why should the MWC get comparable money when its been irrelevant and absent from the TV landscape?

(04-19-2017 09:21 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

TMK, and as I said in my last post this is key, NBC made an offer and ESPN simply matched it. There was no contractual right for NBC to counter.

This says otherwise......
http://g5conferencenews.blogspot.com/201...-most.html

"How about NBC? NBC sports bid for the rights to the American Conference only to lose the bid to ESPN. Why did NBC lose? They lost or won(depending on who you ask) because they did not want to pay more than 2 million per team for what the American had to offer. NBC was not willing to pay more for the likes of UConn basketball and a decent AAC football lineup. Instead, NBC decided that its current sports lineup and its big investment in the English Premier League Soccer(football everywhere else) was enough."

Who is TKM?

(04-19-2017 09:24 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:33 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 07:52 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:27 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:07 PM)AGuyIn_Water Wrote:  Can you explain your MWC lineup? I am intereted

Why try? Nobody can compete with your "everything is awesome....it is fun when you're part of a team" outlook. SDSU does have Don Coryell though, and that is about as relevant as your Phi Slamma Jamma reference.

Fanhood you are the most jealous poster on these boards.The AAC is head and shoulders above the MWC. The MWC is even talking about pulling out of their relationship with ESPN because the money may not be worth the time slots they have been given for tv. AAC has positioned itself for a good payday.

Aresco added Witcha State with the blessing of ESPN. ESPN is going to pay decent money for the AAC. If you don't like it tough.Your bitter rants will not change this reality.

This made me smile. Jealous?

I would be jealous if you had something that the MW doesn't currently have. If the AAC did actually get a $5 million dollar a year per team TV contract, yes I would then be jealous. Until then, I will continue to laugh at your myopia, and predict you get a nominal increase in TV revenue.

This proves what I just said. Your sole basis for your opinion is that it doesnt significantly exceed what the MWC gets...... Even though the AAC has been building a following on ESPN all these years, and winning at a clip to make it relevant in all-sports. It also has better brands in the money sports, in highly populated areas on the country.
The MWC has slipped into the abyss. Mediocre football. Terrible basketball and olympics. Why should the MWC get comparable money when its been irrelevant and absent from the TV landscape?

You didn't just "prove" anything. You simply stated four or five opinions.

:-) This is fun.

(04-19-2017 09:16 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

Why are you so obsessed, fangood?
You have no credentials that you've let on to support that you have relevant insight into television valuations. You want to poo poo ratings markers that have driven the industry. You offer no data or intelligent analysis. You just pick a number out of the air that suits the position of your favorite conference the MWC. Lol.

Frankly, I find this board amusing. It is a pleasant distraction to the grinds of work, family, military, and other responsibilities.

They myopia, and the blind hope makes me smile. In fact, I am smiling right now.

Cannot wait to see the contract!!!! Yessssss!

(04-19-2017 09:46 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:16 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

Why are you so obsessed, fangood?
You have no credentials that you've let on to support that you have relevant insight into television valuations. You want to poo poo ratings markers that have driven the industry. You offer no data or intelligent analysis. You just pick a number out of the air that suits the position of your favorite conference the MWC. Lol.

Frankly, I find this board amusing. It is a pleasant distraction to the grinds of work, family, military, and other responsibilities.

They myopia, and the blind hope makes me smile. In fact, I am smiling right now.

Cannot wait to see the contract!!!! Yessssss!

Don't worry that Kafkaesque world you are living in will be given a shot of some much needed meritocracy medicine when the AAC lands a nice contract.

(04-19-2017 09:53 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:46 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:16 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

Why are you so obsessed, fangood?
You have no credentials that you've let on to support that you have relevant insight into television valuations. You want to poo poo ratings markers that have driven the industry. You offer no data or intelligent analysis. You just pick a number out of the air that suits the position of your favorite conference the MWC. Lol.

Frankly, I find this board amusing. It is a pleasant distraction to the grinds of work, family, military, and other responsibilities.

They myopia, and the blind hope makes me smile. In fact, I am smiling right now.

Cannot wait to see the contract!!!! Yessssss!

Don't worry that Kafkaesque world you are living in will be given a shot of some much needed meritocracy medicine when the AAC lands a nice contract.

Good word.

(04-19-2017 09:44 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:24 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:33 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 07:52 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(04-18-2017 11:27 PM)fanhood Wrote:  Why try? Nobody can compete with your "everything is awesome....it is fun when you're part of a team" outlook. SDSU does have Don Coryell though, and that is about as relevant as your Phi Slamma Jamma reference.

Fanhood you are the most jealous poster on these boards.The AAC is head and shoulders above the MWC. The MWC is even talking about pulling out of their relationship with ESPN because the money may not be worth the time slots they have been given for tv. AAC has positioned itself for a good payday.

Aresco added Witcha State with the blessing of ESPN. ESPN is going to pay decent money for the AAC. If you don't like it tough.Your bitter rants will not change this reality.

This made me smile. Jealous?

I would be jealous if you had something that the MW doesn't currently have. If the AAC did actually get a $5 million dollar a year per team TV contract, yes I would then be jealous. Until then, I will continue to laugh at your myopia, and predict you get a nominal increase in TV revenue.

This proves what I just said. Your sole basis for your opinion is that it doesnt significantly exceed what the MWC gets...... Even though the AAC has been building a following on ESPN all these years, and winning at a clip to make it relevant in all-sports. It also has better brands in the money sports, in highly populated areas on the country.
The MWC has slipped into the abyss. Mediocre football. Terrible basketball and olympics. Why should the MWC get comparable money when its been irrelevant and absent from the TV landscape?

You didn't just "prove" anything. You simply stated four or five opinions.

:-) This is fun.

There's no opinions in there. The MWC is a 1 bid monstrosity. It's not in TV favorable time zones. It's never been a ratings draw. Its in sparsely populated areas. It doesn't have a history of drawing a sizeable viewership in FB like the AAC. Invisible in the other Olympics (as opposed to the AAC, which has nationally competitive Olympics from MBB, to WBB to Baseball). You're trying to compare television deals and there is absolutely no comparison.

(04-19-2017 09:43 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:21 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

TMK, and as I said in my last post this is key, NBC made an offer and ESPN simply matched it. There was no contractual right for NBC to counter.

This says otherwise......
http://g5conferencenews.blogspot.com/201...-most.html

"How about NBC? NBC sports bid for the rights to the American Conference only to lose the bid to ESPN. Why did NBC lose? They lost or won(depending on who you ask) because they did not want to pay more than 2 million per team for what the American had to offer. NBC was not willing to pay more for the likes of UConn basketball and a decent AAC football lineup. Instead, NBC decided that its current sports lineup and its big investment in the English Premier League Soccer(football everywhere else) was enough."

Who is TKM?

That says absolutely nothing about a counter offer. In fact it actually appears to confirm that they made an initial bid that was not high enough for ESPN to refuse their matching rights.

The MWC is a more spread out Western MAC. Reverse the W in WAC (which is what the new MWC really is) and it spells MAC. I don't know why you're not on the MAC boards. They're ahead of you.

(04-19-2017 09:58 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:44 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:24 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:33 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 07:52 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  Fanhood you are the most jealous poster on these boards.The AAC is head and shoulders above the MWC. The MWC is even talking about pulling out of their relationship with ESPN because the money may not be worth the time slots they have been given for tv. AAC has positioned itself for a good payday.

Aresco added Witcha State with the blessing of ESPN. ESPN is going to pay decent money for the AAC. If you don't like it tough.Your bitter rants will not change this reality.

This made me smile. Jealous?

I would be jealous if you had something that the MW doesn't currently have. If the AAC did actually get a $5 million dollar a year per team TV contract, yes I would then be jealous. Until then, I will continue to laugh at your myopia, and predict you get a nominal increase in TV revenue.

This proves what I just said. Your sole basis for your opinion is that it doesnt significantly exceed what the MWC gets...... Even though the AAC has been building a following on ESPN all these years, and winning at a clip to make it relevant in all-sports. It also has better brands in the money sports, in highly populated areas on the country.
The MWC has slipped into the abyss. Mediocre football. Terrible basketball and olympics. Why should the MWC get comparable money when its been irrelevant and absent from the TV landscape?

You didn't just "prove" anything. You simply stated four or five opinions.

:-) This is fun.

There's no opinions in there. The MWC is a 1 bid monstrosity. It's not in TV favorable time zones. It's never been a ratings draw. Its in sparsely populated areas. It doesn't have a history of drawing a sizeable viewership in FB like the AAC. Invisible in the other Olympics (as opposed to the AAC, which has nationally competitive Olympics from MBB, to WBB to Baseball). You're trying to compare television deals and there is absolutely no comparison.

You make me smile. No sense countering you, as I have never claimed the MW is a spectacular conference (it was the best basketball conference in America just four years ago though). Rather, just pointing out that your exception of $5 million a year for the AAC is comically optimistic. Like I said, I will be here to laugh at you in a few years.

Can someone book mark this thread?

(04-19-2017 10:03 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:43 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 09:21 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(04-19-2017 08:47 AM)fanhood Wrote:  Can somebody provide proof of Pesik's statement of "nbc wants us and will bid to incease the price between espn?" In the last go around NBC refused to outbid ESPNs $2 million a year.

TMK, and as I said in my last post this is key, NBC made an offer and ESPN simply matched it. There was no contractual right for NBC to counter.

This says otherwise......
http://g5conferencenews.blogspot.com/201...-most.html

"How about NBC? NBC sports bid for the rights to the American Conference only to lose the bid to ESPN. Why did NBC lose? They lost or won(depending on who you ask) because they did not want to pay more than 2 million per team for what the American had to offer. NBC was not willing to pay more for the likes of UConn basketball and a decent AAC football lineup. Instead, NBC decided that its current sports lineup and its big investment in the English Premier League Soccer(football everywhere else) was enough."

Who is TKM?

That says absolutely nothing about a counter offer. In fact it actually appears to confirm that they made an initial bid that was not high enough for ESPN to refuse their matching rights.

It actually doesn't confirm that. It says that they refused to pay $2 million per year, and decided to focus on valuable properties like EPL, and other items.

So, if NBC refused to pay $2 million a year, you think they are now going to pay $6 million to $10 million for the same teams, plus Navy, just five years later? If so.....my god.

(04-19-2017 10:05 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  The MWC is a more spread out Western MAC. Reverse the W in WAC (which is what the new MWC really is) and it spells MAC. I don't know why you're not on the MAC boards. They're ahead of you.

You are right, the MW is the old WAC. Agree on that.

Meanwhile, the AAC has 8 CUSA teams, two BCS rejects, one that was the original BCS reject while also being a MAC school, plus Navy.