(04-27-2018 12:11 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'm pretty sure that sub licensing is something that is at the winning bidders discretion. I don't think there's anything that the AAC could do to prevent say ESPN who won the bid to sublicense if they wanted to CBSSN.

Sublicensing is a negotiated point. Some contracts will grant a broad right to do so (as the AAC deal appeared to do), some contracts might allow for sublicensing with conference approval and/or restrictions (e.g. must be on a national linear network in a certain number of households), and other contracts might not allow it all (which is how the Power Five TV contracts are structured). It really all depends upon the specific deal.

(04-27-2018 12:11 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I'm pretty sure that sub licensing is something that is at the winning bidders discretion. I don't think there's anything that the AAC could do to prevent say ESPN who won the bid to sublicense if they wanted to CBSSN.

All in what you negotiate. Typical contract will specify how many appearances per network or how many households.

There was talk that ESPN had to sublicense AAC to CBSSN in order to meet the appearance terms since it has similar reach to ESPNU.

That may have been rank speculation but that was the chatter.

I don't see ESPN sublicensing with ESPN+ now going, they have a way to monetize what would have been on ESPN3.

(04-26-2018 08:01 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(04-26-2018 07:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-26-2018 07:12 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  I am trying to figure out why this would be just a UConn problem if the payout was insufficient. I would think a lot of the presidents to these schools would have a problem with this. I can't believe Cinn, USF, UCF, UH, and others would have to make decisions, too, whether to keep the conference as is.

It's a problem for UConn, Cincy, and USF because they have been skating by financially on legacy dollars from the old Big East, which the other AAC schools got only a small portion of by comparison. Those dollars essentially end this year, so those three schools are looking to the new AAC deal to make up for that money coming to an end.

But what makes UConn different than Cincy and USF is whereas those schools will just have to grin and bear it, because they have no options, UConn (at least presumably) could decide to join the Big East.

As for AAC value to ESPN, there's just no evidence out there to form an opinion on. The only tidbit of information was about a year and a half ago, right after the Big 12 decided not to expand, Aresco said he was going to sit down with ESPN around Christmas (2016) to open discussions about extending the TV deal. But Aresco hasn't uttered a word about that since.

JR is quick to point out that ESPN controls the top football school rights south of Washington, DC. This is because of their penetration of the south with the ACC, SEC, Big 12 and the AAC.
If FOX wants to get into southern markets, they will have to go head to head with ESPN and win the contract with the AAC.
This is really good news for the AAC, they are sure to get a big pay increase this time around.

Nice one, LOL.

Seriously though, I hope this is true, because I'd like the AAC to get as much as possible - USF can use the money. But FOX isn't going to make meaningful inroads in the southern market vs a network that has the SEC and ACC and Big 12 by acquiring the AAC. That's like a rival movie studio executive thinking "Disney has the Marvel and Pixar and Star Wars franchises, but we are going to compete in the fantasy market against them with, I don't know, Teletubbies!"

(04-26-2018 09:25 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(04-26-2018 07:24 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(04-26-2018 07:12 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  I am trying to figure out why this would be just a UConn problem if the payout was insufficient. I would think a lot of the presidents to these schools would have a problem with this. I can't believe Cinn, USF, UCF, UH, and others would have to make decisions, too, whether to keep the conference as is.

It's a problem for UConn, Cincy, and USF because they have been skating by financially on legacy dollars from the old Big East, which the other AAC schools got only a small portion of by comparison. Those dollars essentially end this year, so those three schools are looking to the new AAC deal to make up for that money coming to an end.

But what makes UConn different than Cincy and USF is whereas those schools will just have to grin and bear it, because they have no options, UConn (at least presumably) could decide to join the Big East.

As for AAC value to ESPN, there's just no evidence out there to form an opinion on. The only tidbit of information was about a year and a half ago, right after the Big 12 decided not to expand, Aresco said he was going to sit down with ESPN around Christmas (2016) to open discussions about extending the TV deal. But Aresco hasn't uttered a word about that since.

Again, it is a problem for more than the former BE schools. This is big for any school in any conference not being an autonomous conference, not just the AAC. If the AAC can't bring in the money they expect, why stick around to go into debt, with the quality and ratings that the AAC has proven. This is why I believe it will be enough to satisfy the conference presidents, which will be at least, 7 to 8 m, whether it be with ESPiN or multiple arrangements with other network or digital companies.

"Stick around" in what sense? Let's say the new AAC contract comes in at around $3m a school, a big disappointment. What are USF and Cincy, or Memphis and Houston, going to do other than just hunker down and deal with it? They aren't going to leave for C-USA or the Sun Belt. They don't have options to leave for.

(04-27-2018 06:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

Quote:JR is quick to point out that ESPN controls the top football school rights south of Washington, DC. This is because of their penetration of the south with the ACC, SEC, Big 12 and the AAC.
If FOX wants to get into southern markets, they will have to go head to head with ESPN and win the contract with the AAC.
This is really good news for the AAC, they are sure to get a big pay increase this time around.

Nice one, LOL.

Seriously though, I hope this is true, because I'd like the AAC to get as much as possible - USF can use the money. But FOX isn't going to make meaningful inroads in the southern market vs a network that has the SEC and ACC and Big 12 by acquiring the AAC. That's like a rival movie studio executive thinking "Disney has the Marvel and Pixar and Star Wars franchises, but we are going to compete in the fantasy market against them with, I don't know, Teletubbies!"

I'm pretty sure that FS1 or Big Fox will get better ratings in the Old Confederacy with Big 12 and Big Ten games than with AAC games, even if the AAC teams are local.

ESPN has the inventory and flexibility to keep AAC football "on the bench" in down years so that they can elevate a top 25 matchup to ABC, or a top 25 AAC team beating down a conference rival with a good record to a solid spot on ESPN/2/U.

Ten, fifteen years ago some of the chatter was about ESPN "warehousing" college sports rights--buying them up without showing them. With ABC/ESPN/2/U/News/+, they can effectively warehouse content (eat the costs of production, or dump those costs onto the schools, without expectation of revenue for most of the games) for the sake of securing the nuggets of gold (the 2 or 3 valuable games a year in that conference's package).

Fox Sports doesn't have that capability.

(04-27-2018 06:36 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  "Stick around" in what sense? Let's say the new AAC contract comes in at around $3m a school, a big disappointment. What are USF and Cincy, or Memphis and Houston, going to do other than just hunker down and deal with it? They aren't going to leave for C-USA or the Sun Belt. They don't have options to leave for.

Spend less money. Business plan based on the expectation of being more like Ohio or Georgia State than Mississippi State or Purdue. Which can fairly be described as "giving up", relative to their aspirations, rhetoric and strategic planning of the last 10 years or so.

I at some of the posts I just read but I understand everyone's entitled to their own opinion and yes even those who are so against an AAC bump $$$... lol

Every business want products that will be profitable to them TV networks are no different but for them tv ratings results is their primary achiever.

The difference between yesterday's and tomorrow's table renegotiations, the AAC this time has tv results available... And no I'm not saying the AAC will get 10 times its current trash crappy deal but definitely two or three times more what each member currently gets.

Also what I find interesting is that we have not heard much of Mike Aresco as of late... IDK perhaps negotiations are underway now.

(04-27-2018 04:45 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  I at some of the posts I just read but I understand everyone's entitled to their own opinion and yes even those who are so against an AAC bump $$$... lol

Every business want products that will be profitable to them TV networks are no different but for them tv ratings results is their primary achiever.

The difference between yesterday's and tomorrow's table renegotiations, the AAC this time has tv results available... And no I'm not saying the AAC will get 10 times its current trash crappy deal but definitely two or three times more what each member currently gets.

Also what I find interesting is that we have not heard much of Mike Aresco as of late... IDK perhaps negotiations are underway now.

TV results? You guys in no way have any leg to stand on in these negotiations. Ypu think ESPN wont let you walk away?

(04-27-2018 05:27 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 04:45 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  I at some of the posts I just read but I understand everyone's entitled to their own opinion and yes even those who are so against an AAC bump $$$... lol

Every business want products that will be profitable to them TV networks are no different but for them tv ratings results is their primary achiever.

The difference between yesterday's and tomorrow's table renegotiations, the AAC this time has tv results available... And no I'm not saying the AAC will get 10 times its current trash crappy deal but definitely two or three times more what each member currently gets.

Also what I find interesting is that we have not heard much of Mike Aresco as of late... IDK perhaps negotiations are underway now.

TV results? You guys in no way have any leg to stand on in these negotiations. Ypu think ESPN wont let you walk away?

To be fair, "two to three times" what the schools currently get is in the general neighborhood of $3.5-5.5 million per school. That's actually not that unreasonable and seems a likely endpoint to negotiations. What I don't get is idea that if the AAC gets $4 or 5 million a year a school it'll somehow be the kind of vindication that makes everyone else look silly.

(04-27-2018 05:32 PM)Bogg Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 05:27 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 04:45 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  I at some of the posts I just read but I understand everyone's entitled to their own opinion and yes even those who are so against an AAC bump $$$... lol

Every business want products that will be profitable to them TV networks are no different but for them tv ratings results is their primary achiever.

The difference between yesterday's and tomorrow's table renegotiations, the AAC this time has tv results available... And no I'm not saying the AAC will get 10 times its current trash crappy deal but definitely two or three times more what each member currently gets.

Also what I find interesting is that we have not heard much of Mike Aresco as of late... IDK perhaps negotiations are underway now.

TV results? You guys in no way have any leg to stand on in these negotiations. Ypu think ESPN wont let you walk away?

To be fair, "two to three times" what the schools currently get is in the general neighborhood of $3.5-5.5 million per school. That's actually not that unreasonable and seems a likely endpoint to negotiations. What I don't get is idea that if the AAC gets $4 or 5 million a year a school it'll somehow be the kind of vindication that makes everyone else look silly.

Yes, I expect around $7m a year, but with a range of $5m to $8m. I think that range is the consensus expectation so nobody will be shocked if the number is in that area.

(04-27-2018 04:45 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  I at some of the posts I just read but I understand everyone's entitled to their own opinion and yes even those who are so against an AAC bump $$$... lol

Every business want products that will be profitable to them TV networks are no different but for them tv ratings results is their primary achiever.

The difference between yesterday's and tomorrow's table renegotiations, the AAC this time has tv results available... And no I'm not saying the AAC will get 10 times its current trash crappy deal but definitely two or three times more what each member currently gets.

Also what I find interesting is that we have not heard much of Mike Aresco as of late... IDK perhaps negotiations are underway now.

The part no one is talking about is this:
There MAY be other reasons— not related to ratings and performance—for Espin not paying the AAC it’s worth.
Key word hints: Cartel 5, agendas, collusion.

(04-27-2018 06:40 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 04:45 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  I at some of the posts I just read but I understand everyone's entitled to their own opinion and yes even those who are so against an AAC bump $$$... lol

Every business want products that will be profitable to them TV networks are no different but for them tv ratings results is their primary achiever.

The difference between yesterday's and tomorrow's table renegotiations, the AAC this time has tv results available... And no I'm not saying the AAC will get 10 times its current trash crappy deal but definitely two or three times more what each member currently gets.

Also what I find interesting is that we have not heard much of Mike Aresco as of late... IDK perhaps negotiations are underway now.

The part no one is talking about is this:
There MAY be other reasons— not related to ratings and performance—for Espin not paying the AAC it’s worth.
Key word hints: Cartel 5, agendas, collusion.

Then ESPN wont get the AAC. Simple as that. With no right of first refusal and a larger pool of bidders, it just wont be possible for ESPN to completely control the game this time around.

My guess is ESPN will budget a certain amount and purchase whatever AAC inventoy they can get with that investment.

Do you know why cbs-sn is growing on me? Objective sportscasting when watching a ball game. They call the games and do a good job. Compare an AAC on espn game to an AAC on CBS-SN game. The ESPN one focuses on the cartel schools and ignores the AAC teams playing as much as possible. When there is “conference talk” about the AAC during the game it’s so disgustingly dismissive, dishonest and negative.

(04-27-2018 06:46 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Do you know why cbs-sn is growing on me? Objective sportscasting when watching a ball game. They call the games and do a good job. Compare an AAC on espn game to an AAC on CBS-SN game. The ESPN one focuses on the cartel schools and ignores the AAC teams playing as much as possible. When there is “conference talk” about the AAC during the game it’s so disgustingly dismissive, dishonest and negative.

Ive said for a long time CBS-Sports should go after the ignored G5 audience and just embrace the role as the G5 network--similar to how Fox embraced the ignored conservative audience in America. They already have MW, CUSA, AAC, and MAC games. If they just pick up some Sunbelt inventory they are set. Create a traveling Saturday morning "Game Day" type program geared to the G5 and they are on their way.

(04-27-2018 06:48 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 06:46 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Do you know why cbs-sn is growing on me? Objective sportscasting when watching a ball game. They call the games and do a good job. Compare an AAC on espn game to an AAC on CBS-SN game. The ESPN one focuses on the cartel schools and ignores the AAC teams playing as much as possible. When there is “conference talk” about the AAC during the game it’s so disgustingly dismissive, dishonest and negative.

Ive said for a long time CBS-Sports should go after the ignored G5 audience and just embrace the role as the G5 network--similar to how Fox embraced the ignored conservative audience in America. They already have MW, CUSA, AAC,a nd MAC games. If they jsut pick up some Sunbelt inventory they are set. Create a traveling Saturday morning "Game Day" type program geared to the G5 and they are on their way.

Me and you have agreed on this. Let the naysayers laugh at the CBS-SN game day featuring Boise @ Houston or Air Force @ Navy or San Diego St at UCF all they want. I’d love to see how that would play out. It would work.

CBS does have pretty good crews that make an effort to be informed about the product, that I do agree on.

(04-27-2018 06:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 06:40 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 04:45 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  I at some of the posts I just read but I understand everyone's entitled to their own opinion and yes even those who are so against an AAC bump $$$... lol

Every business want products that will be profitable to them TV networks are no different but for them tv ratings results is their primary achiever.

The difference between yesterday's and tomorrow's table renegotiations, the AAC this time has tv results available... And no I'm not saying the AAC will get 10 times its current trash crappy deal but definitely two or three times more what each member currently gets.

Also what I find interesting is that we have not heard much of Mike Aresco as of late... IDK perhaps negotiations are underway now.

The part no one is talking about is this:
There MAY be other reasons— not related to ratings and performance—for Espin not paying the AAC it’s worth.
Key word hints: Cartel 5, agendas, collusion.

Then ESPN wont get the AAC. Simple as that. With no right of first refusal and a larger pool of bidders, it just wont be possible for ESPN to completely control the game this time around.

My guess is ESPN will budget a certain amount and purchase whatever AAC inventoy they can get with that investment.

I wouldn't count NBC out

I mean if NBC was brave enough to gamble on a so called dead walking conference imagine what NBC would do now now that the AAC crawling stage days are well behind.

As for ESPN I seriously doubt they take a step back... In fact I'm calling every ESPN negotiations tactics a bluff.

(04-27-2018 06:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 06:48 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 06:46 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Do you know why cbs-sn is growing on me? Objective sportscasting when watching a ball game. They call the games and do a good job. Compare an AAC on espn game to an AAC on CBS-SN game. The ESPN one focuses on the cartel schools and ignores the AAC teams playing as much as possible. When there is “conference talk” about the AAC during the game it’s so disgustingly dismissive, dishonest and negative.

Ive said for a long time CBS-Sports should go after the ignored G5 audience and just embrace the role as the G5 network--similar to how Fox embraced the ignored conservative audience in America. They already have MW, CUSA, AAC,a nd MAC games. If they jsut pick up some Sunbelt inventory they are set. Create a traveling Saturday morning "Game Day" type program geared to the G5 and they are on their way.

Me and you have agreed on this. Let the naysayers laugh at the CBS-SN game day featuring Boise @ Houston or Air Force @ Navy or San Diego St at UCF all they want. I’d love to see how that would play out. It would work.

No thanks

If UConn bolts, then adding Army + A10 program would cover the bases. I am more worried about Cincy, Navy, or Houston leaving if I'm the AAC. Those are harder to replace with like schools.

(04-28-2018 01:21 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  If UConn bolts, then adding Army + A10 program would cover the bases. I am more worried about Cincy, Navy, or Houston leaving if I'm the AAC. Those are harder to replace with like schools.

Navy leaving wouldn't be much of a blow, because Navy will always have their separate, distinct identity. They are "independent" in that sense even if formally they are in the conference. Nobody has or ever will think of Navy as an "AAC school".

UConn would be impossible to replace, because they are the AAC's only flagship university with a modicum of athletic presence. The only flagships the AAC could attract would be UMass or Rhode Island and the like, and they don't count, have zero athletic history, not "flagships" in that sense.

Cincy would be a bigger blow than Houston because Houston is a noob member, and because Cincy leaving would be a blow to the AAC's northern presence, would cost it regional balance, which it needs because it will never have a strong regional identity.

(04-28-2018 12:53 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 06:54 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 06:48 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-27-2018 06:46 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  Do you know why cbs-sn is growing on me? Objective sportscasting when watching a ball game. They call the games and do a good job. Compare an AAC on espn game to an AAC on CBS-SN game. The ESPN one focuses on the cartel schools and ignores the AAC teams playing as much as possible. When there is “conference talk” about the AAC during the game it’s so disgustingly dismissive, dishonest and negative.

Ive said for a long time CBS-Sports should go after the ignored G5 audience and just embrace the role as the G5 network--similar to how Fox embraced the ignored conservative audience in America. They already have MW, CUSA, AAC,a nd MAC games. If they jsut pick up some Sunbelt inventory they are set. Create a traveling Saturday morning "Game Day" type program geared to the G5 and they are on their way.

Me and you have agreed on this. Let the naysayers laugh at the CBS-SN game day featuring Boise @ Houston or Air Force @ Navy or San Diego St at UCF all they want. I’d love to see how that would play out. It would work.

No thanks

You guys from Beantown love NBC sports huh?