(01-09-2020 11:23 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 09:41 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 03:20 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 09:51 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 08:21 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  .
The alarming suggestion that adding 1 FB and 1 BB/olympic school would cause the AAC to follow the path that the old Big East took, or "a Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys and football-onlys," seems overly hyperbolic, to put it mildly.

The old Big East was entirely different. The fundamental reason why the old BE broke up - - after 12 extremely successful seasons - - was that the interests and objectives of their FB/BB schools (mostly large State-affiliated universities) were vastly different from those of the private non-FB schools (a.k.a. the "catholic 7").

Navy (FB only) and Wichita State (non-FB) both consider it to be, by far, in their best interests to play in the AAC. The arrangement has worked out spectacularly well for both schools, and for the AAC as a whole.

The conversation here has focused on following the Navy/Wichita approach to replace UConn with a FB and BB/olympic school, or possibly, another all-sports school (e.g., Colorado State).

There haven't been any indications that the AAC intends to replicate the old Big East's model.

So there wasn't a "Navy/Wichita approach"

Navy and the Big East signed membership paperwork in January of 2012. Navy vocally staying the course when the C7 schools left and Boise reneged made Navy one of the most valuable brands and members years before the midshipmen played a game in conference.

The move to add Wichita State came five years later and was based on the inherent value of adding Wichita State sans football, not on any need to match twelve football playing schools with a twelfth all sports school.

This is true, but the model worked so well that it is worth repeating if either of the other Service Academy is willing to follow that model.

I would only propose adding a Football only and Olympic only addition if it involved one or both of the service Academies, it would be a mistake to do that with any other additions.

Regarding the model that the BIG EAST had I never liked having football only additions.

Football expansion:

"About a decade after the conference's inception, Big East members decided to become a major football conference and thus added five schools including Rutgers, Miami, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia – though only Miami would be offered full all-sports membership immediately. The inaugural Big East football season launched in 1991.[9] West Virginia and Rutgers were offered admission to the Big East as full members starting in the 1995–96 academic year,[10] and Notre Dame, committed to its football independence, was offered a non-football membership effective the same year.[11] Virginia Tech would be forced to wait until 2000–01 for full admission,[12] and Temple remained a football-only member until 2004, when it was voted out of the conference due to poor attendance figures, lack of playing success, and inadequate facilities'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_East_C..._expansion

I don't understand... DECIDED??? I mean... We did too, right?

The BIG EAST was an ESPN "darling" at the time so the got the good press and herbage.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but after watching the 30 for 30: Requiem of the Big East, ESPN made the Big East into the dominant conference it was due to the exposure and the Big East jumpstarted ESPN into the giant that it is today

(01-09-2020 09:53 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  So now ESPN can go get Air Force, Colorado State, and Boise for $21MM per year, effectively kill off the MWC, get us an auto-birth to the Cotton bowl, and have 6 power conferences (5 1/2 if you're looking at money).

It would be for FB-only, at ~ $ M/year, but you may have a point there, if they can sell it to the schools and the AAC members.

Various combinations of those 3 schools, and or SDSU could work, although the likeliest scenario would be for the AAC to add just one.


Adding 3 would probably be more beneficial to ESPN, and to the AAC from a very long term standpoint, since it would guarantee that the conference will continue to thrive, even if the P5 steals a couple of AAC schools in 2025-2026.

(01-09-2020 08:49 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:29 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:13 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  .

ESPN making the call, if you want the same money you have to replace Conn.

Need large market, proximity to NYC, sell lots of ESPN+ subscriptions, decent OOC sch, flexible starts

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

According to Commissioner Aresco, who has stated that ESPN has gone along with the AAC's decisions, the AAC will be making the call. However, it may be true that ESPN has discussions with the AAC during the process and provides various kinds of viewership data or market analysis that end up guiding development of a short list.

Agree that the AAC and ESPN will both have to replace UConn, either within two years, or before 2026, in order to insure the conference against the devastating consequences of dropping to 9 teams, if two AAC teams jump to the P5 during a potential 2025-26 realignment.

If the conference should drop to 9 teams, the terms of the contract with ESPN could dissolve the broadcasting relationship, or at least allow ESPN to renegotiate it on more favorable terms.

Doubt that ESPN would insist on adding a northeastern FB-only or all-sports school to tap into the NYC market region. However, they might be inclined to give SUNY Buffalo a bump up in the discussions.

From their standpoint, a package of AF and VCU would probably generate the most income over the long term.


CoastalJuan Wrote:
.
At the bare minimum, you just have to replace the eyeballs/subscriptions that UConn would have drawn, which about 50% of G4 programs do. So replacing UConn money would just require picking from the top 50%.

Most of us, however, would rather make an improvement than just replace low hanging fruit.

From both ESPN's and the AAC's viewpoint, failing to replace the UConn viewership within the next 2-6 years would be fiscally irresponsible. ESPN would realize >5% less revenue from losing most of the northeastern U.S., including metro NYC (over life of contract, that would amount to a loss of >$50,000,000 by ESPN).

The fiscal problem for the AAC would be that the value of their broadcasting rights would diminish, which would tend to lower the ceiling on future contract negotiations. Such negotiations might end up taking place as early as 2005 or 2006, if the AAC loses another team or two.

Making an improvement (in FB, at least) is essential, rather than adding a mediocre FB and BB school, and it would be mandated by the AAC members and heavily supported by ESPN. Assuming that BYU and Boise St. are off the board, Air Force and SDSU would each boost the AAC's FB viewership, as well as the national profile of the conference. Colorado State might, as well, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, due to medium level FB program and smaller viewership base.

Whether it's possible to improve on UConn MBB and WBB's viewership, with their location in the Boston-NYC megalopolis, would be difficult.

However, a school like VCU would tap into the middle atlantic region viewership, and has over 10 million potential viewers living within two hours driving time of their location. It's also located near the eastern seaboard, within an hour's drive of the greater "Bos-Wash (Boston to Washington) megalopolis," so it's more relevant to the northeastern region than western basketball schools are.

Its worth pointing out that the Big12 lost Missouri, Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Colorado. It only added 2 teams (TCU and W Virginia)--meaning only 2 of Missouri, Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Colorado were replaced. Yet--ESPN did not reduce the contract....even when it meant there was less inventory and no CCG. My guess is that ESPN will probably make an adjustment to the AAC contract, but I dont think they believe there will be any significant degrading of the audience size for the remaining AAC inventory.

That said, I think its worth looking at this from a business point of view. It would seem to me that ESPN would prefer to spend 7-21 million toward allowing the AAC to poach 6-18 games of western (MW) inventory over paying an extra 7 million for a bunch of App St/Georgia St/Buffalo (etc) inventory that ESPN already owns. That doesnt mean it will happen---but it certainly makes a lot more sense for ESPN.

(01-09-2020 11:40 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 09:53 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  So now ESPN can go get Air Force, Colorado State, and Boise for $21MM per year, effectively kill off the MWC, get us an auto-birth to the Cotton bowl, and have 6 power conferences (5 1/2 if you're looking at money).

It would be for FB-only, at ~ $ M/year, but you may have a point there, if they can sell it to the schools and the AAC members.

Various combinations of those 3 schools, and or SDSU could work, although the likeliest scenario would be for the AAC to add just one.


Adding 3 would probably be more beneficial to ESPN, and to the AAC from a very long term standpoint, since it would guarantee that the conference will continue to thrive, even if the P5 steals a couple of AAC schools in 2025-2026.

You sure talk like you are an insider... But I doubt you are, as wide-eye as your first posts were a couple months ago.

My point is, ESPN can now add an all-sports western pod with 3 MWC teams, since their travel disadvantage would be diminished having 2 other teams within driving distance, and 4 additional teams in the Texas/Oklahoma/Kansas edges of their current conference footprint. They can now add them to the AAC because there's this BIIIGGGG Gaping HOLE in their United States coverage map. Now that they no longer own MWC athletics...

I know you think I don't know my a$$ from hole in the ground.
Saw another post, Conn is 44th in Twitter accounts, list is for top 70.
Of the 8 schools that have contract with ESPN+, Conn would be 6th.
Kansas is the only school with more athletic dept Twitter accounts
then Conn from them 8.

Now I don't know much you can guage ESPN+ subscriptions
From Twitter accounts. Them #'s would have projected Conn
Top 5 in revenue for +

(01-09-2020 08:15 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 05:13 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 05:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 05:03 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is a list of the bottom 20 FBS teams in average attendance based on their last 4 years of attendance (credit to Bullet for posting the list to the Realignment Board). It’s amazing how many of these bottom 20 teams keep getting mentioned as legit options to replace UConn. It’s just moronic.

Bottom 20 schools (Note Idaho was 11,566 their last 4 years in FBS, better than 3 schools on this list)
Texas State 16,456 SB
Buffalo 16,410 MAC
Miami, OH 16,400 MAC
Eastern Michigan 16,343 MAC
Georgia State 16,184 SB
Florida Atlantic 15,920 CUSA
Western Kentucky 15,708 CUSA
MTSU 15,673 CUSA
Bowling Green 15,340 MAC
Florida International 15,159 CUSA
New Mexico State 14,849 IND
San Jose State 14,819 MWC
Central Michigan 14,329 MAC
Louisiana-Monroe 13,569 SB
Coastal Carolina 13,538 SB
UNC Charlotte 12,531 CUSA
Kent State 12,506 MAC
Massachusetts 11,275 IND
Northern Illinois 10,308 MAC
Ball State 9,475 MAC

Was UCF's attendance that great before the AAC? Before UCF hired Frost.

UCF attendance was just over 30K the year before Frost. It was 32K the year before UCF began AAC play. So, it was not anywhere even remotely close to 16K if thats what you are asking. Id also point out---those are 4 year averages on that list---so its not like we are looking at one really bad year. None of the teams on that list should be considered as a viable option.

Saw some same numbers from another poster. I concede. GSU would be a gamble, but adding any other team not Boise Or BYU is the same. I prefer waiting it out, just as you have posted before.

Again, the service academy, Air Force, and VCU seem to fit most posters' expectations best, although it could be argued that SDSU has been as successful as BYU and Boise State have been (10 bowls in a row).

After the new MWC contract, If ESPiN wants AF to join the AAC, they better do a bit better for the AAC teams.

(01-09-2020 11:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:56 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  The only 2 teams in or near the state of New York that can replace UConn are...

1. Army/VCU
2. Buffalo (Buffalo is a better academic institution overall than UConn is)

I still think that ignoring Buffalo and Georgia State would be a mistake.

Eh. The people of New York and Georgia seem to think its ok to ignore them. There are better choices....

At this time.

(01-09-2020 11:31 PM)BattleCougarRed_88 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 11:23 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 09:41 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 03:20 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 09:51 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  So there wasn't a "Navy/Wichita approach"

Navy and the Big East signed membership paperwork in January of 2012. Navy vocally staying the course when the C7 schools left and Boise reneged made Navy one of the most valuable brands and members years before the midshipmen played a game in conference.

The move to add Wichita State came five years later and was based on the inherent value of adding Wichita State sans football, not on any need to match twelve football playing schools with a twelfth all sports school.

This is true, but the model worked so well that it is worth repeating if either of the other Service Academy is willing to follow that model.

I would only propose adding a Football only and Olympic only addition if it involved one or both of the service Academies, it would be a mistake to do that with any other additions.

Regarding the model that the BIG EAST had I never liked having football only additions.

Football expansion:

"About a decade after the conference's inception, Big East members decided to become a major football conference and thus added five schools including Rutgers, Miami, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia – though only Miami would be offered full all-sports membership immediately. The inaugural Big East football season launched in 1991.[9] West Virginia and Rutgers were offered admission to the Big East as full members starting in the 1995–96 academic year,[10] and Notre Dame, committed to its football independence, was offered a non-football membership effective the same year.[11] Virginia Tech would be forced to wait until 2000–01 for full admission,[12] and Temple remained a football-only member until 2004, when it was voted out of the conference due to poor attendance figures, lack of playing success, and inadequate facilities'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_East_C..._expansion

I don't understand... DECIDED??? I mean... We did too, right?

The BIG EAST was an ESPN "darling" at the time so the got the good press and herbage.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but after watching the 30 for 30: Requiem of the Big East, ESPN made the Big East into the dominant conference it was due to the exposure and the Big East jumpstarted ESPN into the giant that it is today

Correct, and it was a partnership for both parties, a well oiled machine until Miami President Donna Shalala decided to accept a invitation to the AAC.

Very complicated process... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NCAA_...Conference

For it to work for ESPN, and AAC teams they will have to pay a premium for any MWC adds, maybe bumping up average to 8 mil per school. AAC would have more travel cost, and the MWC schools would need enough extra to be worth their jump.
I doubt that 1 school works, likely would need 3. AF, Col State, and one more, makes the most sense. With Memphis and Tulane moving east.

(01-09-2020 09:41 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 03:20 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 09:51 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 08:21 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:17 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  jed clampett's reply:

Yes, add VCU, and do it quickly. But to stay with 11 FB schools would be irresponsible, because the only way to ensure the conference's well-being beyond 2026 is to replace UConn FB with a better FB school. Otherwise, the AAC could face the prospects of having only 9 FB programs, given the very real possibility that two AAC schools could be stolen by the Big-12 by 2026.


geosnooker's reply:

Because then we start to creep closer and closer to what the old BigEast was. A laughing stock amongst the power conferences. A Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys over here, and football-onlys over there. Voting imbalances. Jealousies not easily reconciled. A mess.

.
The alarming suggestion that adding 1 FB and 1 BB/olympic school would cause the AAC to follow the path that the old Big East took, or "a Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys and football-onlys," seems overly hyperbolic, to put it mildly.

The old Big East was entirely different. The fundamental reason why the old BE broke up - - after 12 extremely successful seasons - - was that the interests and objectives of their FB/BB schools (mostly large State-affiliated universities) were vastly different from those of the private non-FB schools (a.k.a. the "catholic 7").

Navy (FB only) and Wichita State (non-FB) both consider it to be, by far, in their best interests to play in the AAC. The arrangement has worked out spectacularly well for both schools, and for the AAC as a whole.

The conversation here has focused on following the Navy/Wichita approach to replace UConn with a FB and BB/olympic school, or possibly, another all-sports school (e.g., Colorado State).

There haven't been any indications that the AAC intends to replicate the old Big East's model.

So there wasn't a "Navy/Wichita approach"

Navy and the Big East signed membership paperwork in January of 2012. Navy vocally staying the course when the C7 schools left and Boise reneged made Navy one of the most valuable brands and members years before the midshipmen played a game in conference.

The move to add Wichita State came five years later and was based on the inherent value of adding Wichita State sans football, not on any need to match twelve football playing schools with a twelfth all sports school.

This is true, but the model worked so well that it is worth repeating if either of the other Service Academy is willing to follow that model.

I would only propose adding a Football only and Olympic only addition if it involved one or both of the service Academies, it would be a mistake to do that with any other additions.

Regarding the model that the BIG EAST had I never liked having football only additions.

Football expansion:

"About a decade after the conference's inception, Big East members decided to become a major football conference and thus added five schools including Rutgers, Miami, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia – though only Miami would be offered full all-sports membership immediately. The inaugural Big East football season launched in 1991.[9] West Virginia and Rutgers were offered admission to the Big East as full members starting in the 1995–96 academic year,[10] and Notre Dame, committed to its football independence, was offered a non-football membership effective the same year.[11] Virginia Tech would be forced to wait until 2000–01 for full admission,[12] and Temple remained a football-only member until 2004, when it was voted out of the conference due to poor attendance figures, lack of playing success, and inadequate facilities'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_East_C..._expansion

I don't understand... DECIDED??? I mean... We did too, right?

The language is a little bit clunky, but they decided to become a major football conference in the sense that they decided to start sponsoring football at all, and there were enough independent programs of significance to grab that they were able to secure a spot in the bowl coalition right away.

Prior to 1991 the Big East looked a lot more like it's current model than the version that existed throughout the 2000's - 9 members, no sponsoring of football, focus fixed almost entirely on men's basketball.

(01-10-2020 09:20 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  For it to work for ESPN, and AAC teams they will have to pay a premium for any MWC adds, maybe bumping up average to 8 mil per school. AAC would have more travel cost, and the MWC schools would need enough extra to be worth their jump.
I doubt that 1 school works, likely would need 3. AF, Col State, and one more, makes the most sense. With Memphis and Tulane moving east.

At that point it starts looking less cost effective for ESPN. Adding 3 teams to the AAC at 8 million a team is 24 million. Adding the 1 million to each existing AAC team (to get them all to 8 million each) would cost another 11 million. Total cost there is 35 million (minus the 7 million they originally planned to pay UConn---so its really 28 million). They could have simply purchased the MW first or second tier rights for less than that price.

What might be better would be for ESPN to pay for one new team---AF or Colorado St (7 million---which they were already planning to pay to UConn) and then pay a 500K late night bonus for a package of games that kick at 9-10pm ET. Your central time AAC schools and Colorado St would likely voluntarily provide 10 or so late night games to largely alleviate the late night inventory shortage caused by losing the MW. Total cost of something like this plan would be a total of only 12 million----and if you consider the 7 million they were already paying UConn---the net cost falls to just 5 million. That said, you have a good point about the pay out. Its very possible the MW contract got close enough to the AAC deal that the AAC payout premium is simply no longer large enough to motivate a AF/CSU type school to jump conferences.

(01-09-2020 08:49 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:29 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:13 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  .

ESPN making the call, if you want the same money you have to replace Conn.

Need large market, proximity to NYC, sell lots of ESPN+ subscriptions, decent OOC sch, flexible starts

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

According to Commissioner Aresco, who has stated that ESPN has gone along with the AAC's decisions, the AAC will be making the call. However, it may be true that ESPN has discussions with the AAC during the process and provides various kinds of viewership data or market analysis that end up guiding development of a short list.

Agree that the AAC and ESPN will both have to replace UConn, either within two years, or before 2026, in order to insure the conference against the devastating consequences of dropping to 9 teams, if two AAC teams jump to the P5 during a potential 2025-26 realignment.

If the conference should drop to 9 teams, the terms of the contract with ESPN could dissolve the broadcasting relationship, or at least allow ESPN to renegotiate it on more favorable terms.

Doubt that ESPN would insist on adding a northeastern FB-only or all-sports school to tap into the NYC market region. However, they might be inclined to give SUNY Buffalo a bump up in the discussions.

From their standpoint, a package of AF and VCU would probably generate the most income over the long term.


CoastalJuan Wrote:
.
At the bare minimum, you just have to replace the eyeballs/subscriptions that UConn would have drawn, which about 50% of G4 programs do. So replacing UConn money would just require picking from the top 50%.

Most of us, however, would rather make an improvement than just replace low hanging fruit.

From both ESPN's and the AAC's viewpoint, failing to replace the UConn viewership within the next 2-6 years would be fiscally irresponsible. ESPN would realize >5% less revenue from losing most of the northeastern U.S., including metro NYC (over life of contract, that would amount to a loss of >$50,000,000 by ESPN).

The fiscal problem for the AAC would be that the value of their broadcasting rights would diminish, which would tend to lower the ceiling on future contract negotiations. Such negotiations might end up taking place as early as 2005 or 2006, if the AAC loses another team or two.

Making an improvement (in FB, at least) is essential, rather than adding a mediocre FB and BB school, and it would be mandated by the AAC members and heavily supported by ESPN. Assuming that BYU and Boise St. are off the board, Air Force and SDSU would each boost the AAC's FB viewership, as well as the national profile of the conference. Colorado State might, as well, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, due to medium level FB program and smaller viewership base.

Whether it's possible to improve on UConn MBB and WBB's viewership, with their location in the Boston-NYC megalopolis, would be difficult.

However, a school like VCU would tap into the middle atlantic region viewership, and has over 10 million potential viewers living within two hours driving time of their location. It's also located near the eastern seaboard, within an hour's drive of the greater "Bos-Wash (Boston to Washington) megalopolis," so it's more relevant to the northeastern region than western basketball schools are.

I agree with you there. I wasn't saying we shouldn't replace UConn's viewership. I, like many others, am saying that we should be patient and add the best member possible, rather than just adding a team that would replace UConn's numbers.

In other words, I'm down for replacing a 4. I'd just prefer to replace them with a 9, rather than another 4.

(01-10-2020 11:41 AM)Bogg Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 09:41 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 03:20 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 09:51 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 08:21 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  .
The alarming suggestion that adding 1 FB and 1 BB/olympic school would cause the AAC to follow the path that the old Big East took, or "a Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys and football-onlys," seems overly hyperbolic, to put it mildly.

The old Big East was entirely different. The fundamental reason why the old BE broke up - - after 12 extremely successful seasons - - was that the interests and objectives of their FB/BB schools (mostly large State-affiliated universities) were vastly different from those of the private non-FB schools (a.k.a. the "catholic 7").

Navy (FB only) and Wichita State (non-FB) both consider it to be, by far, in their best interests to play in the AAC. The arrangement has worked out spectacularly well for both schools, and for the AAC as a whole.

The conversation here has focused on following the Navy/Wichita approach to replace UConn with a FB and BB/olympic school, or possibly, another all-sports school (e.g., Colorado State).

There haven't been any indications that the AAC intends to replicate the old Big East's model.

So there wasn't a "Navy/Wichita approach"

Navy and the Big East signed membership paperwork in January of 2012. Navy vocally staying the course when the C7 schools left and Boise reneged made Navy one of the most valuable brands and members years before the midshipmen played a game in conference.

The move to add Wichita State came five years later and was based on the inherent value of adding Wichita State sans football, not on any need to match twelve football playing schools with a twelfth all sports school.

This is true, but the model worked so well that it is worth repeating if either of the other Service Academy is willing to follow that model.

I would only propose adding a Football only and Olympic only addition if it involved one or both of the service Academies, it would be a mistake to do that with any other additions.

Regarding the model that the BIG EAST had I never liked having football only additions.

Football expansion:

"About a decade after the conference's inception, Big East members decided to become a major football conference and thus added five schools including Rutgers, Miami, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia – though only Miami would be offered full all-sports membership immediately. The inaugural Big East football season launched in 1991.[9] West Virginia and Rutgers were offered admission to the Big East as full members starting in the 1995–96 academic year,[10] and Notre Dame, committed to its football independence, was offered a non-football membership effective the same year.[11] Virginia Tech would be forced to wait until 2000–01 for full admission,[12] and Temple remained a football-only member until 2004, when it was voted out of the conference due to poor attendance figures, lack of playing success, and inadequate facilities'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_East_C..._expansion

I don't understand... DECIDED??? I mean... We did too, right?

The language is a little bit clunky, but they decided to become a major football conference in the sense that they decided to start sponsoring football at all, and there were enough independent programs of significance to grab that they were able to secure a spot in the bowl coalition right away.

Prior to 1991 the Big East looked a lot more like it's current model than the version that existed throughout the 2000's - 9 members, no sponsoring of football, focus fixed almost entirely on men's basketball.

This is true, which is why Penn State was not part of the BIG EAST, Joe Paterno wanted to take all of Pretty much the same teams that eventually would windup in the BIG EAST but make it focused on football...

Penn State Football: What If Joe Paterno's East Coast Conference Plan Succeeded?
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1332...-succeeded

(01-10-2020 01:11 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 08:49 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:29 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:13 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  .

ESPN making the call, if you want the same money you have to replace Conn.

Need large market, proximity to NYC, sell lots of ESPN+ subscriptions, decent OOC sch, flexible starts

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

According to Commissioner Aresco, who has stated that ESPN has gone along with the AAC's decisions, the AAC will be making the call. However, it may be true that ESPN has discussions with the AAC during the process and provides various kinds of viewership data or market analysis that end up guiding development of a short list.

Agree that the AAC and ESPN will both have to replace UConn, either within two years, or before 2026, in order to insure the conference against the devastating consequences of dropping to 9 teams, if two AAC teams jump to the P5 during a potential 2025-26 realignment.

If the conference should drop to 9 teams, the terms of the contract with ESPN could dissolve the broadcasting relationship, or at least allow ESPN to renegotiate it on more favorable terms.

Doubt that ESPN would insist on adding a northeastern FB-only or all-sports school to tap into the NYC market region. However, they might be inclined to give SUNY Buffalo a bump up in the discussions.

From their standpoint, a package of AF and VCU would probably generate the most income over the long term.


CoastalJuan Wrote:
.
At the bare minimum, you just have to replace the eyeballs/subscriptions that UConn would have drawn, which about 50% of G4 programs do. So replacing UConn money would just require picking from the top 50%.

Most of us, however, would rather make an improvement than just replace low hanging fruit.

From both ESPN's and the AAC's viewpoint, failing to replace the UConn viewership within the next 2-6 years would be fiscally irresponsible. ESPN would realize >5% less revenue from losing most of the northeastern U.S., including metro NYC (over life of contract, that would amount to a loss of >$50,000,000 by ESPN).

The fiscal problem for the AAC would be that the value of their broadcasting rights would diminish, which would tend to lower the ceiling on future contract negotiations. Such negotiations might end up taking place as early as 2005 or 2006, if the AAC loses another team or two.

Making an improvement (in FB, at least) is essential, rather than adding a mediocre FB and BB school, and it would be mandated by the AAC members and heavily supported by ESPN. Assuming that BYU and Boise St. are off the board, Air Force and SDSU would each boost the AAC's FB viewership, as well as the national profile of the conference. Colorado State might, as well, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, due to medium level FB program and smaller viewership base.

Whether it's possible to improve on UConn MBB and WBB's viewership, with their location in the Boston-NYC megalopolis, would be difficult.

However, a school like VCU would tap into the middle atlantic region viewership, and has over 10 million potential viewers living within two hours driving time of their location. It's also located near the eastern seaboard, within an hour's drive of the greater "Bos-Wash (Boston to Washington) megalopolis," so it's more relevant to the northeastern region than western basketball schools are.

I agree with you there. I wasn't saying we shouldn't replace UConn's viewership. I, like many others, am saying that we should be patient and add the best member possible, rather than just adding a team that would replace UConn's numbers.

In other words, I'm down for replacing a 4. I'd just prefer to replace them with a 9, rather than another 4.

AF Football and VCU Olympic/Basketball would probably add up to 11?? That's pretty good math in my book.

(01-10-2020 01:56 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 01:11 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 08:49 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:29 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:13 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  .

ESPN making the call, if you want the same money you have to replace Conn.

Need large market, proximity to NYC, sell lots of ESPN+ subscriptions, decent OOC sch, flexible starts

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

According to Commissioner Aresco, who has stated that ESPN has gone along with the AAC's decisions, the AAC will be making the call. However, it may be true that ESPN has discussions with the AAC during the process and provides various kinds of viewership data or market analysis that end up guiding development of a short list.

Agree that the AAC and ESPN will both have to replace UConn, either within two years, or before 2026, in order to insure the conference against the devastating consequences of dropping to 9 teams, if two AAC teams jump to the P5 during a potential 2025-26 realignment.

If the conference should drop to 9 teams, the terms of the contract with ESPN could dissolve the broadcasting relationship, or at least allow ESPN to renegotiate it on more favorable terms.

Doubt that ESPN would insist on adding a northeastern FB-only or all-sports school to tap into the NYC market region. However, they might be inclined to give SUNY Buffalo a bump up in the discussions.

From their standpoint, a package of AF and VCU would probably generate the most income over the long term.


CoastalJuan Wrote:
.
At the bare minimum, you just have to replace the eyeballs/subscriptions that UConn would have drawn, which about 50% of G4 programs do. So replacing UConn money would just require picking from the top 50%.

Most of us, however, would rather make an improvement than just replace low hanging fruit.

From both ESPN's and the AAC's viewpoint, failing to replace the UConn viewership within the next 2-6 years would be fiscally irresponsible. ESPN would realize >5% less revenue from losing most of the northeastern U.S., including metro NYC (over life of contract, that would amount to a loss of >$50,000,000 by ESPN).

The fiscal problem for the AAC would be that the value of their broadcasting rights would diminish, which would tend to lower the ceiling on future contract negotiations. Such negotiations might end up taking place as early as 2005 or 2006, if the AAC loses another team or two.

Making an improvement (in FB, at least) is essential, rather than adding a mediocre FB and BB school, and it would be mandated by the AAC members and heavily supported by ESPN. Assuming that BYU and Boise St. are off the board, Air Force and SDSU would each boost the AAC's FB viewership, as well as the national profile of the conference. Colorado State might, as well, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, due to medium level FB program and smaller viewership base.

Whether it's possible to improve on UConn MBB and WBB's viewership, with their location in the Boston-NYC megalopolis, would be difficult.

However, a school like VCU would tap into the middle atlantic region viewership, and has over 10 million potential viewers living within two hours driving time of their location. It's also located near the eastern seaboard, within an hour's drive of the greater "Bos-Wash (Boston to Washington) megalopolis," so it's more relevant to the northeastern region than western basketball schools are.

I agree with you there. I wasn't saying we shouldn't replace UConn's viewership. I, like many others, am saying that we should be patient and add the best member possible, rather than just adding a team that would replace UConn's numbers.

In other words, I'm down for replacing a 4. I'd just prefer to replace them with a 9, rather than another 4.

AF Football and VCU Olympic/Basketball would probably add up to 11?? That's pretty good math in my book.

Not trying to be an Ahole but UConn viewership? Maybe in Men's Hoops. Football...uhhhhh..nah! Women's Hoops-OK but no where near Men's sports numbers. No disrespect ladies. If we are talking about just replacing UCONN eyeballs then adding a nationally branded hoops team makes the most sense like a VCU. Just my opinion but if BYU is not a all sports player, I would prefer Boise St or AF or Colorado St.

(01-10-2020 03:30 PM)Pirate1989 Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 01:56 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 01:11 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 08:49 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:29 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

According to Commissioner Aresco, who has stated that ESPN has gone along with the AAC's decisions, the AAC will be making the call. However, it may be true that ESPN has discussions with the AAC during the process and provides various kinds of viewership data or market analysis that end up guiding development of a short list.

Agree that the AAC and ESPN will both have to replace UConn, either within two years, or before 2026, in order to insure the conference against the devastating consequences of dropping to 9 teams, if two AAC teams jump to the P5 during a potential 2025-26 realignment.

If the conference should drop to 9 teams, the terms of the contract with ESPN could dissolve the broadcasting relationship, or at least allow ESPN to renegotiate it on more favorable terms.

Doubt that ESPN would insist on adding a northeastern FB-only or all-sports school to tap into the NYC market region. However, they might be inclined to give SUNY Buffalo a bump up in the discussions.

From their standpoint, a package of AF and VCU would probably generate the most income over the long term.


CoastalJuan Wrote:
.
At the bare minimum, you just have to replace the eyeballs/subscriptions that UConn would have drawn, which about 50% of G4 programs do. So replacing UConn money would just require picking from the top 50%.

Most of us, however, would rather make an improvement than just replace low hanging fruit.

From both ESPN's and the AAC's viewpoint, failing to replace the UConn viewership within the next 2-6 years would be fiscally irresponsible. ESPN would realize >5% less revenue from losing most of the northeastern U.S., including metro NYC (over life of contract, that would amount to a loss of >$50,000,000 by ESPN).

The fiscal problem for the AAC would be that the value of their broadcasting rights would diminish, which would tend to lower the ceiling on future contract negotiations. Such negotiations might end up taking place as early as 2005 or 2006, if the AAC loses another team or two.

Making an improvement (in FB, at least) is essential, rather than adding a mediocre FB and BB school, and it would be mandated by the AAC members and heavily supported by ESPN. Assuming that BYU and Boise St. are off the board, Air Force and SDSU would each boost the AAC's FB viewership, as well as the national profile of the conference. Colorado State might, as well, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, due to medium level FB program and smaller viewership base.

Whether it's possible to improve on UConn MBB and WBB's viewership, with their location in the Boston-NYC megalopolis, would be difficult.

However, a school like VCU would tap into the middle atlantic region viewership, and has over 10 million potential viewers living within two hours driving time of their location. It's also located near the eastern seaboard, within an hour's drive of the greater "Bos-Wash (Boston to Washington) megalopolis," so it's more relevant to the northeastern region than western basketball schools are.

I agree with you there. I wasn't saying we shouldn't replace UConn's viewership. I, like many others, am saying that we should be patient and add the best member possible, rather than just adding a team that would replace UConn's numbers.

In other words, I'm down for replacing a 4. I'd just prefer to replace them with a 9, rather than another 4.

AF Football and VCU Olympic/Basketball would probably add up to 11?? That's pretty good math in my book.

Not trying to be an Ahole but UConn viewership? Maybe in Men's Hoops. Football...uhhhhh..nah! Women's Hoops-OK but no where near Men's sports numbers. No disrespect ladies. If we are talking about just replacing UCONN eyeballs then adding a nationally branded hoops team makes the most sense like a VCU. Just my opinion but if BYU is not a all sports player, I would prefer Boise St or AF or Colorado St.

VCU a national brand? What world is that. A quick Wikipedia look at them says 2011 was a banner year but in basketball pedigree they come nowhere close to UConn. I don't have a horse in this race anymore but come on now. No A-10 team has a "national brand." Yes, that includes Dayton.

(01-10-2020 04:29 PM)WhalerFan Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 03:30 PM)Pirate1989 Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 01:56 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 01:11 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 08:49 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  From both ESPN's and the AAC's viewpoint, failing to replace the UConn viewership within the next 2-6 years would be fiscally irresponsible. ESPN would realize >5% less revenue from losing most of the northeastern U.S., including metro NYC (over life of contract, that would amount to a loss of >$50,000,000 by ESPN).

The fiscal problem for the AAC would be that the value of their broadcasting rights would diminish, which would tend to lower the ceiling on future contract negotiations. Such negotiations might end up taking place as early as 2005 or 2006, if the AAC loses another team or two.

Making an improvement (in FB, at least) is essential, rather than adding a mediocre FB and BB school, and it would be mandated by the AAC members and heavily supported by ESPN. Assuming that BYU and Boise St. are off the board, Air Force and SDSU would each boost the AAC's FB viewership, as well as the national profile of the conference. Colorado State might, as well, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, due to medium level FB program and smaller viewership base.

Whether it's possible to improve on UConn MBB and WBB's viewership, with their location in the Boston-NYC megalopolis, would be difficult.

However, a school like VCU would tap into the middle atlantic region viewership, and has over 10 million potential viewers living within two hours driving time of their location. It's also located near the eastern seaboard, within an hour's drive of the greater "Bos-Wash (Boston to Washington) megalopolis," so it's more relevant to the northeastern region than western basketball schools are.

I agree with you there. I wasn't saying we shouldn't replace UConn's viewership. I, like many others, am saying that we should be patient and add the best member possible, rather than just adding a team that would replace UConn's numbers.

In other words, I'm down for replacing a 4. I'd just prefer to replace them with a 9, rather than another 4.

AF Football and VCU Olympic/Basketball would probably add up to 11?? That's pretty good math in my book.

Not trying to be an Ahole but UConn viewership? Maybe in Men's Hoops. Football...uhhhhh..nah! Women's Hoops-OK but no where near Men's sports numbers. No disrespect ladies. If we are talking about just replacing UCONN eyeballs then adding a nationally branded hoops team makes the most sense like a VCU. Just my opinion but if BYU is not a all sports player, I would prefer Boise St or AF or Colorado St.

VCU a national brand? What world is that. A quick Wikipedia look at them says 2011 was a banner year but in basketball pedigree they come nowhere close to UConn. I don't have a horse in this race anymore but come on now. No A-10 team has a "national brand." Yes, that includes Dayton.

That 2011 got the Rams tons of national publicity that people still believe that they are a national brand and Shaka Smart eventually to Texas... Since UConn loves their basketball ill phrase it this way alone they would not replace basketball in overall accomplishment, but combined with AF then yes they would be better than what UConn is today... had UConn football maintained what they did in 2010 then ESPN would have probably been able to Negotiate an SNY deal.

I remember Hofstra University being pretty popular in the north east some 20+ years ago, but since they dropped football they are irrelevant in basketball in comparison.

Not sure what will become of UConn football down the line , but without a football presence it is hard to stay relevant Nationally unless you continue to win or compete for National Championships.

(01-10-2020 04:58 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  I remember Hofstra University being pretty popular in the north east some 20+ years ago, but since they dropped football they are irrelevant in basketball in comparison.

Hofstra football had a moment 20 years ago almost entirely as a result of spillover from the Jets, due to their part in Wayne Chrebet's origin story (and Hofstra being a little nothing program was a big part of that). Aside from the hometown kid making the Jets Hofstra's never been a big deal.

(01-09-2020 11:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 08:49 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:29 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 10:13 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  .

ESPN making the call, if you want the same money you have to replace Conn.

Need large market, proximity to NYC, sell lots of ESPN+ subscriptions, decent OOC sch, flexible starts

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

According to Commissioner Aresco, who has stated that ESPN has gone along with the AAC's decisions, the AAC will be making the call. However, it may be true that ESPN has discussions with the AAC during the process and provides various kinds of viewership data or market analysis that end up guiding development of a short list.

Agree that the AAC and ESPN will both have to replace UConn, either within two years, or before 2026, in order to insure the conference against the devastating consequences of dropping to 9 teams, if two AAC teams jump to the P5 during a potential 2025-26 realignment.

If the conference should drop to 9 teams, the terms of the contract with ESPN could dissolve the broadcasting relationship, or at least allow ESPN to renegotiate it on more favorable terms.

Doubt that ESPN would insist on adding a northeastern FB-only or all-sports school to tap into the NYC market region. However, they might be inclined to give SUNY Buffalo a bump up in the discussions.

From their standpoint, a package of AF and VCU would probably generate the most income over the long term.


CoastalJuan Wrote:
.
At the bare minimum, you just have to replace the eyeballs/subscriptions that UConn would have drawn, which about 50% of G4 programs do. So replacing UConn money would just require picking from the top 50%.

Most of us, however, would rather make an improvement than just replace low hanging fruit.

From both ESPN's and the AAC's viewpoint, failing to replace the UConn viewership within the next 2-6 years would be fiscally irresponsible. ESPN would realize >5% less revenue from losing most of the northeastern U.S., including metro NYC (over life of contract, that would amount to a loss of >$50,000,000 by ESPN).

The fiscal problem for the AAC would be that the value of their broadcasting rights would diminish, which would tend to lower the ceiling on future contract negotiations. Such negotiations might end up taking place as early as 2005 or 2006, if the AAC loses another team or two.

Making an improvement (in FB, at least) is essential, rather than adding a mediocre FB and BB school, and it would be mandated by the AAC members and heavily supported by ESPN. Assuming that BYU and Boise St. are off the board, Air Force and SDSU would each boost the AAC's FB viewership, as well as the national profile of the conference. Colorado State might, as well, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, due to medium level FB program and smaller viewership base.

Whether it's possible to improve on UConn MBB and WBB's viewership, with their location in the Boston-NYC megalopolis, would be difficult.

However, a school like VCU would tap into the middle atlantic region viewership, and has over 10 million potential viewers living within two hours driving time of their location. It's also located near the eastern seaboard, within an hour's drive of the greater "Bos-Wash (Boston to Washington) megalopolis," so it's more relevant to the northeastern region than western basketball schools are.

Its worth pointing out that the Big12 lost Missouri, Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Colorado. It only added 2 teams (TCU and W Virginia)--meaning only 2 of Missouri, Nebraska, Texas A&M, and Colorado were replaced. Yet--ESPN did not reduce the contract....even when it meant there was less inventory and no CCG. My guess is that ESPN will probably make an adjustment to the AAC contract, but I dont think they believe there will be any significant degrading of the audience size for the remaining AAC inventory.

That said, I think its worth looking at this from a business point of view. It would seem to me that ESPN would prefer to spend 7-21 million toward allowing the AAC to poach 6-18 games of western (MW) inventory over paying an extra 7 million for a bunch of App St/Georgia St/Buffalo (etc) inventory that ESPN already owns. That doesnt mean it will happen---but it certainly makes a lot more sense for ESPN.

Your last paragraph is spot on. Buffalo, App St and Geo. St are near worthless. Only App St has any decent attendance or viewership. Go for Air Force, if we can get them.

Navy's radio PBP guy was asked point blank on Memphis radio before the Liberty Bowl about Navy's position on Air Force moving to the AAC & he said he could see no way that Navy would support that addition