(12-31-2021 07:07 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  Good win for CMU and a bonus P5 win to boot.

Nice MAC rebound. Started 0-4 and finished 3-5. Still not stellar by any means, but better than how it was looking earlier on.

SEC was 1-5 last night after Purdue beat Tennessee. Think they have the worst bowl record right now.

(12-31-2021 05:40 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  A great day for CMU and the MAC on national TV!

P6.

This game was on at every bar in America, available to every TV in the country, including mine. Boy was I pumped for the Chips that entire game. First half was a ton of fun, second half had me on my feet. Great win for the Chips and for the MAC. Thanks for bringing home $4.3 million for the league!!

(12-31-2021 05:40 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  A great day for CMU and the MAC on national TV!

And, Gary Danielson mentioned two or three times how he was watching mid-week MAC games in November and how much he enjoyed that!

(12-31-2021 08:58 PM)inductchuck16 Wrote:  This game was on at every bar in America, available to every TV in the country, including mine. Boy was I pumped for the Chips that entire game. First half was a ton of fun, second half had me on my feet. Great win for the Chips and for the MAC. Thanks for bringing home $4.3 million for the league!!

They aren't getting the full payment.

(12-31-2021 09:01 PM)bobcat_backer Wrote:  

(12-31-2021 05:40 PM)BeatWestern! Wrote:  A great day for CMU and the MAC on national TV!

And, Gary Danielson mentioned two or three times how he was watching mid-week MAC games in November and how much he enjoyed that!

No offense to Rockets fans, but he might have enjoyed the EMU/TOL game the first Tuesday of November AKA election day in certain states.

(12-31-2021 09:48 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(12-31-2021 08:58 PM)inductchuck16 Wrote:  This game was on at every bar in America, available to every TV in the country, including mine. Boy was I pumped for the Chips that entire game. First half was a ton of fun, second half had me on my feet. Great win for the Chips and for the MAC. Thanks for bringing home $4.3 million for the league!!

They aren't getting the full payment.

It’s a significant payment. It might not be 4 million but it’s a very good payment. This bowl was actually profitable for Centra Michigan and the MAC. Most bowls aren’t.

Kind of hard to know if it’s a good deal until we know what it is. Does anyone actually know, besides that it’s between $4.3M and $0?

(01-01-2022 11:54 AM)OSUFALCON Wrote:  

(12-31-2021 09:48 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  

(12-31-2021 08:58 PM)inductchuck16 Wrote:  This game was on at every bar in America, available to every TV in the country, including mine. Boy was I pumped for the Chips that entire game. First half was a ton of fun, second half had me on my feet. Great win for the Chips and for the MAC. Thanks for bringing home $4.3 million for the league!!

They aren't getting the full payment.

It’s a significant payment. It might not be 4 million but it’s a very good payment. This bowl was actually profitable for Centra Michigan and the MAC. Most bowls aren’t.

I didn't say it was not significant. I just said it wasn't the full amount.

(01-01-2022 01:28 PM)axeme Wrote:  Kind of hard to know if it’s a good deal until we know what it is. Does anyone actually know, besides that it’s between $4.3M and $0?

“CMU also will receive a significantly larger payout at the Sun Bowl, which negotiated with the Mid-American Conference on terms that haven't been released publicly. But it's a ‘sizable’ difference,” commissioner Jon Steinbrecher told The Detroit News.

(01-01-2022 09:18 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 01:28 PM)axeme Wrote:  Kind of hard to know if it’s a good deal until we know what it is. Does anyone actually know, besides that it’s between $4.3M and $0?

The amount was not disclosed but it was “significantly higher” than the AZ Bowl.

According to whom? “Significantly” is a conveniently vague and subjective term. People can be sufficiently appeased by the language so they aren’t concerned with the facts. It’s not hard to actually release the exact amount like other bowls do. I can’t think of a good reason to hide it. We’re talking about payments to a public university. That they just didn’t come out and state the payment right away raises suspicions. If it’s less than the original team was getting, why? And where then is that extra money going?

Yea that amount should be public knowledge.

(01-01-2022 09:34 PM)axeme Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 09:18 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 01:28 PM)axeme Wrote:  Kind of hard to know if it’s a good deal until we know what it is. Does anyone actually know, besides that it’s between $4.3M and $0?

The amount was not disclosed but it was “significantly higher” than the AZ Bowl.

According to whom? “Significantly” is a conveniently vague and subjective term. People can be sufficiently appeased by the language so they aren’t concerned with the facts. It’s not hard to actually release the exact amount like other bowls do. I can’t think of a good reason to hide it. We’re talking about payments to a public university. That they just didn’t come out and state the payment right away raises suspicions. If it’s less than the original team was getting, why? And where then is that extra money going?

“CMU also will receive a significantly larger payout at the Sun Bowl, which negotiated with the Mid-American Conference on terms that haven't been released publicly. But it's a ‘sizable’ difference,” commissioner Jon Steinbrecher told The Detroit News.

(01-01-2022 09:34 PM)axeme Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 09:18 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 01:28 PM)axeme Wrote:  Kind of hard to know if it’s a good deal until we know what it is. Does anyone actually know, besides that it’s between $4.3M and $0?

The amount was not disclosed but it was “significantly higher” than the AZ Bowl.

According to whom? “Significantly” is a conveniently vague and subjective term. People can be sufficiently appeased by the language so they aren’t concerned with the facts. It’s not hard to actually release the exact amount like other bowls do. I can’t think of a good reason to hide it.
We’re talking about payments to a public university. That they just didn’t come out and state the payment right away raises suspicions. If it’s less than the original team was getting, why? And where then is that extra money going?

It has been years since I have seen news reporting on this, but my impression is that, in the MAC, bowl revenue is socialized by the conference much like NCAA men's basketball tournament revenue and BCS revenue. In the case of bowl games: the MAC may well receive all of the bowl revenue directly. I'm pretty sure the MAC then gives participating teams stipends to cover travel expenses. Whatever remains is split among all conference teams, with the conference keeping a share or two for itself to cover MAC operational expenses.

(This assumes there is money left over. It may be that bowl revenue is just enough to cover bowl trip expenses, more or less. We know on paper these bowl games the MAC is participating in are not very lucrative.)

To your proposition that "We’re talking about payments to a public university." Not necessarily. It may well be that the bowl game writes the check to the conference and the conference gives Central Michigan a stipend. It may be that a condition of MAC membership is to cede all bowl revenue to the conference.

As for your concern that the fact that "they just didn’t come out and state the payment right away raises suspicions." I don't share this view. We aren't talking a ton of money here. Honestly, part of the reason for the vagueness may be to shroud the indignity of having to Central Michigan having to play for less than Miami (Florida) would have received for playing the same game.

You ask "If it’s less than the original team was getting, why? And where then is that extra money going?" We know the Sun Bowl pays out big guarantees based on the expectation that it will be able to pair up two opponents able to drive a big walk-up crowd and many eyeballs on CBS. We also know (as much as it may sadden those of us who love #MACtion) that Miami (Florida) has a stronger national following than Central Michigan. With Miami (Florida) suddenly unavailable, the bowl game felt it was in a legal position to ask Central Michigan to accept less if the game was to go forward, and it made that ask.

As far "that extra money" you speak of that Central Michigan and the MAC will not receive: I doubt it exists, really. The contractual relationship between the Sun Bowl and CBS is opaque to me, but I do know CBS and its advertisers are not charities.

(01-02-2022 11:10 AM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 09:34 PM)axeme Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 09:18 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 01:28 PM)axeme Wrote:  Kind of hard to know if it’s a good deal until we know what it is. Does anyone actually know, besides that it’s between $4.3M and $0?

The amount was not disclosed but it was “significantly higher” than the AZ Bowl.

According to whom? “Significantly” is a conveniently vague and subjective term. People can be sufficiently appeased by the language so they aren’t concerned with the facts. It’s not hard to actually release the exact amount like other bowls do. I can’t think of a good reason to hide it.
We’re talking about payments to a public university. That they just didn’t come out and state the payment right away raises suspicions. If it’s less than the original team was getting, why? And where then is that extra money going?

It has been years since I have seen news reporting on this, but my impression is that, in the MAC, bowl revenue is socialized by the conference much like NCAA men's basketball tournament revenue and BCS revenue. In the case of bowl games: the MAC may well receive all of the bowl revenue directly. I'm pretty sure the MAC then gives participating teams stipends to cover travel expenses. Whatever remains is split among all conference teams, with the conference keeping a share or two for itself to cover MAC operational expenses.

(This assumes there is money left over. It may be that bowl revenue is just enough to cover bowl trip expenses, more or less. We know on paper these bowl games the MAC is participating in are not very lucrative.)

To your proposition that "We’re talking about payments to a public university." Not necessarily. It may well be that the bowl game writes the check to the conference and the conference gives Central Michigan a stipend. It may be that a condition of MAC membership is to cede all bowl revenue to the conference.

As for your concern that the fact that "they just didn’t come out and state the payment right away raises suspicions." I don't share this view. We aren't talking a ton of money here. Honestly, part of the reason for the vagueness may be to shroud the indignity of having to Central Michigan having to play for less than Miami (Florida) would have received for playing the same game.

You ask "If it’s less than the original team was getting, why? And where then is that extra money going?" We know the Sun Bowl pays out big guarantees based on the expectation that it will be able to pair up two opponents able to drive a big walk-up crowd and many eyeballs on CBS. We also know (as much as it may sadden those of us who love #MACtion) that Miami (Florida) has a stronger national following than Central Michigan. With Miami (Florida) suddenly unavailable, the bowl game felt it was in a legal position to ask Central Michigan to accept less if the game was to go forward, and it made that ask.

As far "that extra money" you speak of that Central Michigan and the MAC will not receive: I doubt it exists, really. The contractual relationship between the Sun Bowl and CBS is opaque to me, but I do know CBS and its advertisers are not charities.

I agree with your comments. If schools needed to guarantee tickets purchased for the smaller bowls, they could not afford it.

No school wants to take a financial beating on the bowl. Only the QL Bowl could exist as a MAC bowl.

The reason that the MAC has so many bowls, isn't because we are travel like crazy, but because the MAC uses a revenue sharing model as described above.

I too doubt that 'extra money' exists. I see it as a break even proposition which rewards the schools, athletes, fans, etc. but not as a money maker.

Such is life in the MAC...

Don't expect the MAC to announce any details regarding deals, contracts, payouts, etc. We can't even get details on the ESPN TV contract. Steinbrecher runs MAC hq exactly like it is ... a private entity, and the TV contract is a deal between two private entities (ESPN and the conference hq) despite it representing 12 public universities. Ask the Toledo Blade sports people ... they tried, were referred to the hq, and told nothing. An foi doesn't work.

That said, CONGRATS TO THE CHIPS on the BIG WIN!

(01-02-2022 04:38 PM)pvk75 Wrote:  Don't expect the MAC to announce any details regarding deals, contracts, payouts, etc. We can't even get details on the ESPN TV contract. Steinbrecher runs MAC hq exactly like it is ... a private entity, and the TV contract is a deal between two private entities (ESPN and the conference hq) despite it representing 12 public universities. Ask the Toledo Blade sports people ... they tried, were referred to the hq, and told nothing. An foi doesn't work.

That said, CONGRATS TO THE CHIPS on the BIG WIN!

Bingo. I think you nailed. PRIVATE entities aren't subject to FOI.

(01-02-2022 04:38 PM)pvk75 Wrote:  Don't expect the MAC to announce any details regarding deals, contracts, payouts, etc. We can't even get details on the ESPN TV contract. Steinbrecher runs MAC hq exactly like it is ... a private entity, and the TV contract is a deal between two private entities (ESPN and the conference hq) despite it representing 12 public universities. Ask the Toledo Blade sports people ... they tried, were referred to the hq, and told nothing. An foi doesn't work.

That said, CONGRATS TO THE CHIPS on the BIG WIN!

It was also funny how none of the schools had any emails or notes on the tv contract. Hmmm....

(01-02-2022 11:10 AM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 09:34 PM)axeme Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 09:18 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-01-2022 01:28 PM)axeme Wrote:  Kind of hard to know if it’s a good deal until we know what it is. Does anyone actually know, besides that it’s between $4.3M and $0?

The amount was not disclosed but it was “significantly higher” than the AZ Bowl.

According to whom? “Significantly” is a conveniently vague and subjective term. People can be sufficiently appeased by the language so they aren’t concerned with the facts. It’s not hard to actually release the exact amount like other bowls do. I can’t think of a good reason to hide it.
We’re talking about payments to a public university. That they just didn’t come out and state the payment right away raises suspicions. If it’s less than the original team was getting, why? And where then is that extra money going?

It has been years since I have seen news reporting on this, but my impression is that, in the MAC, bowl revenue is socialized by the conference much like NCAA men's basketball tournament revenue and BCS revenue. In the case of bowl games: the MAC may well receive all of the bowl revenue directly. I'm pretty sure the MAC then gives participating teams stipends to cover travel expenses. Whatever remains is split among all conference teams, with the conference keeping a share or two for itself to cover MAC operational expenses.

First off the MAC guarantees that all bowling teams have their expenses covered regardless of payout. That is a taller task this year when 2/3rd's of the conference is appearing in ta bowl game.

1) Bowl expenses are paid.
2) Bowl revenues are collected.
3) Total revenue at the end of the year is distributed to the MAC.

All of the money is ultimately lumped together. The additional revenue from the Sun Bowl is nice but is it enough to offset expenses for 8 bowl eligible teams?

Nice win Chips. Also, was interesting to see the MAC send 8 bowling while PAC12 only had 5 and Sun Belt 4