For UC I think Army and USF games were on ESPN+ but since then all the games have been on ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC. Temple game was going to be on ESPNU.

My guess is this deal will not be as kind to struggling teams as the old one was. If you do well you’ll get better coverage. Probably the way it should be for all parties to the agreement.

(11-29-2020 10:46 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  For UC I think Army and USF games were on ESPN+ but since then all the games have been on ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC. Temple game was going to be on ESPNU.

My guess is this deal will not be as kind to struggling teams as the old one was. If you do well you’ll get better coverage. Probably the way it should be for all parties to the agreement.

Army was regular ESPN. Austin Peay was ESPN+.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Forgot that one. Then again I usually skip the FCS exhibition games.

(11-29-2020 11:02 AM)mlb Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 10:46 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  For UC I think Army and USF games were on ESPN+ but since then all the games have been on ESPN, ESPN2 and ABC. Temple game was going to be on ESPNU.

My guess is this deal will not be as kind to struggling teams as the old one was. If you do well you’ll get better coverage. Probably the way it should be for all parties to the agreement.

Army was regular ESPN. Austin Peay was ESPN+.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

Correct, APU and USF were ESPN+.

I am prepared for 6-8 UC basketball games to be on ESPN+. Basically games that would have been put on CBS Sports are getting streamed on plus. Furman and Lipscomb are on plus, and I imagine 4-6 conference games will be.

(11-28-2020 01:56 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Here's what I show for conference controlled games in 2020, through last week:
ABC - 4 games (including some benefiting from COVID, such as Navy-Tulane)
ESPN - 10 games
ESPN2 - 11 games
ESPNU - 1 game
CBSSN - the "Navy tier" has delivered three out of four - lost the FCS game to their league cancelling play.

The primary rights contract says 20 on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 and 40 on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU. That would leave another 20 for ESPN+, assuming no further timeslot adjustments in the Post-UConn adjustments. With two semi-full weeks and the CCG game to go, we're actually ahead on the top tier of the primary media rights contract behind on the ESPNU "filler" level and probably a little behind delivering to Disney on ESPN3/ESPN+ content.

That's my pull from sportsmediawatch. Includes some "not available" but it is certainly possible that other ESPN2/ESPNU content was not reported but not captured.
And I can think of at least a couple 3/+ games that got bumped up and/or simulcast on both cable and streaming-only with other cancellations.

This is just a tough tough year to make any kind of judgment. But if anything, it looks like exposure is increased.

Updating a little...
ABC - 4 games (including some benefiting from COVID, such as Navy-Tulane)
ESPN - 11 games
ESPN2 - 11 games
ESPNU - 1 game
CBSSN - the "Navy tier" has delivered three out of four - lost the FCS game to their league cancelling play.

ESPN+ - 15 games

I count 15 games on ESPN+ -- 4 FCS games and 11 conference games. Two were originally scheduled for ESPN+ and moved up to ESPN2 and to ABC. Looks like USF and Temple made the most ESPN+ appearances. Teams at the top of the standings still had some appearances - their FCS games and as "loss leaders" which was expected going in.

Pending the next two light weeks and CCG weekend, I'd say we're kind of on target in all the tiers of the deal. If anything, it's just the ESPNU that got shorted content. Would it have been different with all ten conferences starting on week 1? We'll never know.

And we're delivering viewers. Depending on where next two weeks' games get broadcast, we'll come up a little short of conference-inventory viewers after losing some games overall.
Obviously I'm football focused and picture could look very different for basketball and other sports.

(11-29-2020 10:42 AM)IamYourDad Wrote:  I really don’t understand BYU’s stance. They would be guaranteed 7 million per year (maybe slightly more with their addition)...

1) They would only get ~$5 million as a FB-only school, and it's not clear that either the AAC or BYU would be interested in joining as an all-sports school, since BYU BB is in a very good conference (WCC), and has a clearer path to the NCAA tournament in the WCC.

2) BYU would lose the flexibility that they currently have to schedule 8 of their 12 regular season games. They usually play 6-7 games per season against Utah, 2 or 3 other P5 teams, Boise State, Utah State, and a "cupcake" (e.g., FCS) team. To play in the AAC, they would probably have to cut 2 or 3 of these games (e.g., one P5 game, one "cupcake" game (e.g., Idaho St., S. Utah), and Boise or Utah St.)

3) BYU would lose four of their six annual "payouts" (up to $1.5 million per game) that they currently generate by playing away games.* It's possible that these four games could provide BYU with $3 to $6 million per year.

*https://www.vanquishthefoe.com/byu-cougars-football/2015/1/19/7854099/schedule-independence-payout-michigan-nebraska-contract-million

4) Thus, the ~$5 million/year that they would receive from the AAC wouldn't necessarily result in a revenue increase.

5) BYU's revenue stream might be cut if they are required to bargain away their second-tier TV rights, including their FB revenues from their television network (BYU-TV).

6) Unless large numbers of BYU fans are keen to attend annual games vs. western AAC teams such as Tulsa, Tulane, and SMU, BYU's FB attendance could take a hit, due to playing fewer games vs. PAC-12 teams (usually 2-3 per season, including Utah), a 4th P5 (Big Ten) team, and traditional western rivals (Boise, Utah St, nearby FCS teams).

(11-29-2020 10:42 AM)IamYourDad Wrote:  ...and a NY6 bowl which is basically a lock for us. We also get a conference payout from the NY6 which is about 400-500k per team, so it’s basically a 7.5 million per year payout.

Is the NY6 "basically a lock" for the AAC?

It may have seemed that way a year ago, but with the exception of Cincinnati, 2020 hasn't been such a great year for the AAC.

Right now, if Cincy were to lose [i]one game, a non-AAC team (e.g., BYU, Coastal Carolina, or Marshall) would probably in play the G5 NY6 bowl game.[/i]

Due to SMU's loss to ECU, there are only going to be only two AAC teams in the top 30. There are 6 or 7 other non-P5 teams in the top 30 (BYU, C. Car., Marshall, Louisiana, Liberty, SJSU, & Boise St.)

Moreover, the AAC teams will have to contend with some other tough non-P5 contenders for top 25 status, such as Appalachian State and Army.

(11-29-2020 10:42 AM)IamYourDad Wrote:  You also get amazing national exposure to grow your brand. BYU with one of its best teams in a while will play in some terrible bowl game vs an average P5 team. How can the fans be excited about that?

One might expect BYU to have lower viewership numbers than the better AAC teams, but the 2018-2020 viewership data indicate that the only AAC teams that have had a systematic viewership advantage were those that played in NY6 bowl games.

BYU currently leads all non-P5 teams with 7 games that generated 500,000 or more viewers (including Cincinnati (6 games with 485 K+ viewers)).

Similarly, BYU played 8 regular season games that had 500K+ viewers in 2019, and 7 in 2018, while the AAC finalists only played four regular season 500K+ viewer/games apiece in 2018 and 2019.

These numbers suggest that BYU's viewership ratings might not increase significantly - were they to join the AAC - except in those years when they would play in the AAC championship game (net increase in the 2-3 million-viewers range) and advance to play in a NY6 bowl game (net increase in the 9-11 million viewers range, including the AAC championship game).

Whether or not the ability to contend for a conference championship and a path to a NY6 bowl, with the attendant increase in national exposure would be sufficient to persuade BYU to join the AAC isn't clear.

Yet, those and the benefits that go along with conference membership (ease of scheduling, bowl tie-ins, academic affiliation) might be just about all that a conference membership could offer to BYU in the near-term.

...................................................................................................

However, there might be another possibility: Though there haven't been any strong indications that they would be so inclined, BYU could opt to join the AAC as part of a longer-term strategic plan to make their way, gradually, toward affiliation with a power conference.

There might be two possible strategic options of this kind for BYU:

1) Join the AAC to build the stature and visibility of their FB (or FB & BB) program(s), advance to conference championships and NY6 bowls, and hope to get scooped up by one of the P5 conferences, or affiliate with a P5 conference like Notre Dame does with ACC, in the next decade or two.

2) Join the AAC in the hope that, as a consequence, they could help the AAC to evolve into a full-fledged (P6/A6) power conference.

Whether or not the addition of BYU (and a 12th BB school) alone would boost the conference to P6/A6 status or not is unclear.

To make the transition to full power conference status more likely, it might be necessary to work out an agreement with the AAC to expand to 14 by adding two more top 30 quality FB and BB schools.

Regarding comments about struggling teams and ESPN+; I understand the why, and I am sure ESPN has the final say; however, putting the struggling teams on + is a self perpetuating downward cycle. Being on + leads to fewer viewers; leads to tougher recruiting, leads to less interest and support, leads to more relegation to +. As a fan of one of the two teams most shown on + I don’t like it. + is only $6 a month but is out of sight, out of mind for many casual sports fans. IMO the American is creating divisions not in East/West but haves/have nots. Temple and USF have both shown they can pick themselves up and do well, but the American/+ deal makes it more difficult.

Exposure on the major networks this year has been greatly increased due to the greater number of cancelled/postponed games as well as the lack of play by B10/P12 to begin the season (and SEC to a lesser extent).

This year represents the best of what we will see in the entirety of the TV deal most likely. ESPN+ games will likely grow larger as the TV deal goes on and ESPN attempts to normalize ESPN+ in people's minds. I'd expect games on ESPN2/ESPNU this year to transition to + as we go on.

I personally maintain that the TV deal was made for Aresco to tout that he got a billion dollars, nevermind the actual details. I believe we gave away key negotiating points at many turns, and locking us in to 12 years of the deal will be something we regret.

This deal is only good if you compare it to old CUSA deals or current G5 deals. Our conference touts P6, and even if that's a pure marketing term, that should not at all be our measuring point. I'd have been ok with this deal for 6-7 years. To lock us in for 12 without getting more from ESPN was and is a bad move IMO.

(11-28-2020 06:56 PM)Starfox207 Wrote:  I love espn+. I don’t get cable. I watch ecu games and other conference games that I wouldn’t normally watch. I love espn+ and just wish the games would. E simulcast. 599 a month every month for football basketball and baseball. I won’t ever unsubscribe. That’s 7 bucks every month for complete conference access

Are you able to watch football and basketball games from other conferences...or only AAC games?

It should not be assumed that ESPN+ will telecast only the worst AAC football games, for example, a FCS game. For example, the Kansas State @Oklahoma State football game was put on ESPN+. Many fans from both schools were outraged. The thought was ESPN+ scheduled KSU/OSU in order to drive up the number of ESPN+ subscriptions.

(11-29-2020 01:28 PM)vick mike Wrote:  Regarding comments about struggling teams and ESPN+; I understand the why, and I am sure ESPN has the final say; however, putting the struggling teams on + is a self perpetuating downward cycle. Being on + leads to fewer viewers; leads to tougher recruiting, leads to less interest and support, leads to more relegation to +. As a fan of one of the two teams most shown on + I don’t like it. + is only $6 a month but is out of sight, out of mind for many casual sports fans. IMO the American is creating divisions not in East/West but haves/have nots. Temple and USF have both shown they can pick themselves up and do well, but the American/+ deal makes it more difficult.

Looking at Temple's TV telecasts and ESPN+ streams shown below, I sympathize with you. But the alternative would probably be neither TV appearances or streaming on ESPN+. It would probably be ESPN3 for Temple. I agree with you that both Temple and USF will bounce back.

ESPN+: USF, Memphis, Tulane, SMU, ECU
ESPNU: UCF
CBSSN: Navy

(11-29-2020 02:30 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  .

If Commissioner Aresco and the AAC leadership (Presidents, Trustees) were really on the ball with respect to their expressed interests in BYU and their long-term strategic plan for the conference, this might be an effective way to proceed:

I: Establish a joint consensus, as an organization, that the only reason why BYU would strongly consider joining the AAC would be as part of a strategic plan of their own to propel themselves (i.e., BYU) toward power conference status.

II: The AAC Commissioner would invite BYU to discuss a proposal for them to join the AAC, based on a foundational agreement that, by joining, BYU could advance toward power conference status in one of two ways:

A) By affiliating with the AAC, BYU could assist the AAC to develop, gradually, into a full-fledged (P6/A6) power conference.

This would include a contingency plan stipulating that, if the addition of BYU and a 12th BB school isn't sufficient to advance the AAC toward P6/A6 status (e.g., a substantial increase in network revenue per school) by a date certain, the conference would agree to pursue expansion to 13 or 14 teams per sport via the addition of one or more top 30 quality FB schools and one or more NCAA tournament quality BB schools.

B) Alternatively (e.g., if the AAC should fail to advance toward P6/A6 status), by joining the conference, BYU would have the opportunity to increase their national stature - - by competing for conference championships and advancing to NY6 bowls - - which would probably lassist them to become an affiliate (like Notre Dame/ACC) or member of an existing P5 conference.

Neither BYU or Boise State will join AAC until there is an AAC binding agreement. Why join the AAC when it might implode in a few years by losing its best teams to B12 expansion? Everyone is going to have to wait until the B12 renegotiates its TV contract and makes its decision on expansion. Then, and only then, is a binding agreement possible...but I am not sure about that if some AAC schools feel there is an opportunity to move up to a P5 conference.

(11-29-2020 12:32 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(11-28-2020 01:56 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Here's what I show for conference controlled games in 2020, through last week:
ABC - 4 games (including some benefiting from COVID, such as Navy-Tulane)
ESPN - 10 games
ESPN2 - 11 games
ESPNU - 1 game
CBSSN - the "Navy tier" has delivered three out of four - lost the FCS game to their league cancelling play.

The primary rights contract says 20 on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2 and 40 on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU. That would leave another 20 for ESPN+, assuming no further timeslot adjustments in the Post-UConn adjustments. With two semi-full weeks and the CCG game to go, we're actually ahead on the top tier of the primary media rights contract behind on the ESPNU "filler" level and probably a little behind delivering to Disney on ESPN3/ESPN+ content.

That's my pull from sportsmediawatch. Includes some "not available" but it is certainly possible that other ESPN2/ESPNU content was not reported but not captured.
And I can think of at least a couple 3/+ games that got bumped up and/or simulcast on both cable and streaming-only with other cancellations.

This is just a tough tough year to make any kind of judgment. But if anything, it looks like exposure is increased.

Updating a little...
ABC - 4 games (including some benefiting from COVID, such as Navy-Tulane)
ESPN - 11 games
ESPN2 - 11 games
ESPNU - 1 game
CBSSN - the "Navy tier" has delivered three out of four - lost the FCS game to their league cancelling play.

ESPN+ - 15 games

I count 15 games on ESPN+ -- 4 FCS games and 11 conference games. Two were originally scheduled for ESPN+ and moved up to ESPN2 and to ABC. Looks like USF and Temple made the most ESPN+ appearances. Teams at the top of the standings still had some appearances - their FCS games and as "loss leaders" which was expected going in.

Pending the next two light weeks and CCG weekend, I'd say we're kind of on target in all the tiers of the deal. If anything, it's just the ESPNU that got shorted content. Would it have been different with all ten conferences starting on week 1? We'll never know.

And we're delivering viewers. Depending on where next two weeks' games get broadcast, we'll come up a little short of conference-inventory viewers after losing some games overall.
Obviously I'm football focused and picture could look very different for basketball and other sports.

Yes, about 20 AAC games on ESPN+ is the norm for the conference. If the 10 AAC schools (excluding Navy) play six home games, that's a 60 game inventory. Subtract the 40 ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, and ESPNU games under AAC TV contract and that leaves 20 AAC games headed to ESPN+.

(11-29-2020 02:32 PM)Tulsa Guy Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 01:28 PM)vick mike Wrote:  Regarding comments about struggling teams and ESPN+; I understand the why, and I am sure ESPN has the final say; however, putting the struggling teams on + is a self perpetuating downward cycle. Being on + leads to fewer viewers; leads to tougher recruiting, leads to less interest and support, leads to more relegation to +. As a fan of one of the two teams most shown on + I don’t like it. + is only $6 a month but is out of sight, out of mind for many casual sports fans. IMO the American is creating divisions not in East/West but haves/have nots. Temple and USF have both shown they can pick themselves up and do well, but the American/+ deal makes it more difficult.

Looking at Temple's TV telecasts and ESPN+ streams shown below, I sympathize with you. But the alternative would probably be neither TV appearances or streaming on ESPN+. It would probably be ESPN3 for Temple. I agree with you that both Temple and USF will bounce back.

ESPN+: USF, Memphis, Tulane, SMU, ECU
ESPNU: UCF
CBSSN: Navy

ESPN+ is ESPN3 except you have to pay for worse broadcasting quality...

(11-29-2020 02:38 PM)Tulsa Guy Wrote:  

(11-29-2020 02:30 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  .

If Commissioner Aresco and the AAC leadership (Presidents, Trustees) were really on the ball with respect to their expressed interests in BYU and their long-term strategic plan for the conference, this might be an effective way to proceed:

I: Establish a joint consensus, as an organization, that the only reason why BYU would strongly consider joining the AAC would be as part of a strategic plan of their own to propel themselves (i.e., BYU) toward power conference status.

II: The AAC Commissioner would invite BYU to discuss a proposal for them to join the AAC, based on a foundational agreement that, by joining, BYU could advance toward power conference status in one of two ways:

A) By affiliating with the AAC, BYU could assist the AAC to develop, gradually, into a full-fledged (P6/A6) power conference.

This would include a contingency plan stipulating that, if the addition of BYU and a 12th BB school isn't sufficient to advance the AAC toward P6/A6 status (e.g., a substantial increase in network revenue per school) by a date certain, the conference would agree to pursue expansion to 13 or 14 teams per sport via the addition of one or more top 30 quality FB schools and one or more NCAA tournament quality BB schools.

B) Alternatively (e.g., if the AAC should fail to advance toward P6/A6 status), by joining the conference, BYU would have the opportunity to increase their national stature - - by competing for conference championships and advancing to NY6 bowls - - which would probably lassist them to become an affiliate (like Notre Dame/ACC) or member of an existing P5 conference.

Neither BYU or Boise State will join AAC until there is an AAC binding agreement. Why join the AAC when it might implode in a few years by losing its best teams to B12 expansion? Everyone is going to have to wait until the B12 renegotiates its TV contract and makes its decision on expansion. Then, and only then, is a binding agreement possible...but I am not sure about that if some AAC schools feel there is an opportunity to move up to a P5 conference.

Well, any realistic analysis of a P5 conference expansion will tell you that a school will need to bring at LEAST 50 million in JUST MEDIA value in order to make expansion simply BREAK EVEN for its existing members. Worse yet--you need 2 schools that bring 100 million in total media value for a 2 team P5 expansion to BREAK EVEN (so the conference can remain at a nice even number of schools). So---finding 2 schools worth 100 million in combined value, that want to move to your conference is tough---and even then, the big payoff for the existing members is "breaking even". Those two new additions would need to have combined value of 132 million (media value only) just to give each existing conference member a measly $2-million increase in value (not exactly a HUGE financial inducement to expand).

No single AAC school or pair of AAC schools meets those criteria. Frankly, of schools that might consider a new conference, only Texas and Oklahoma would seem to match the criteria needed for P5 expansion. Frankly, I doubt they move because they have excellent deals where they are and have a relatively easy route to the playoff compared to any other conference they might join.

Thus, I dont see much chance of P5 expansion and I suspect none of us are heading anywhere soon. Thus, I think the move would be fairly safe for BYU or Boise. But so what if the AAC is raided? BYU or Boise might be the ones that use an AAC CFP Bowl appearance or two as the springboard to be get plucked from the AAC by a P5. Worse case, if they are left behind in an unattractive AAC--they can always return to where they are now. BYU can go indy anytime they like and its pretty unlikely the MW would turn down Boise if they wanted to return.

There really is not as much risk in the move as one might think. Its really all about whether they are better off in the AAC or where they are now. I think the special deal for Boise is about to play out---so there may be a real financial motivation for Boise to make the jump. BYU might make the jump in order to be a more regular player in the chase for a NYD CFP Bowl slot. Plus, adding BYU might go a long way toward making the AAC winner a viable candidate for the actual playoff--so it could be a win-win for both parties if that comes to fruition.

(11-28-2020 02:45 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  I might be wrong. but we had much better exposure when we we were 1 of 4 conferences playing.

Since then I feel like we had better exposure under the old contract, I miss the ESPiN3 games the most.

I personally will never pay for ESPiN+

Verizon has a bundle that adds ESPN+, Disney+, and HULU to your cell plan. It's part of the top tier unlimited plan that also includes more hotspot data. I needed the hotspot data for work, so now I have ESPN+.

UConn is paying our production fees right now with their 17 million dollar exit fee (thx for that)

as for the deal itself Ive noticed Memphis on ESPN and ABC way more than in CUSA so I like that but its hard to comment on the rest because well COVID 19

The ESPN+ football feeds from Greenville have been pretty good. Nothing like my first exposure to ESPN+, which was ECU at ODU last season. The broadcast was awful and didn’t even have different angles for replays.

One of the camera guys (or gals) yesterday was a little soft on the focus and the main 50-Yd line camera operator got faked out often in the first. Wonder if they are using students.

(11-29-2020 04:58 PM)Chappy Wrote:  The ESPN+ football feeds from Greenville have been pretty good. Nothing like my first exposure to ESPN+, which was ECU at ODU last season. The broadcast was awful and didn’t even have different angles for replays.

One of the camera guys (or gals) yesterday was a little soft on the focus and the main 50-Yd line camera operator got faked out often in the first. Wonder if they are using students.

For football, the plan was for the conference to handle production of ESPN+ games. So some degree of production quality assured. AND that's what, three full crews/suites rather than eleven. Another reason the naysayers claiming + would be our ruination is laighable.

Free ESPN3 is going away. If you subscribe to ESPN+, you can see every game ESPN carries in any fashion for any conference or indy. And all are archived so you can watch later without recording.

And since there is no contract, you can join and drop out and reenlist each football and/or basketball season. And if you don't want to watch on a computer or phone, you can buy a $35 device and cast to your TV.