(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.