(10-01-2015 08:53 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(10-01-2015 05:00 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 03:57 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(09-30-2015 04:16 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(09-29-2015 08:01 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  If ESPN is willing to give the SBC an extra $1 Million, then go for it. If not, forget it.

This is one reason for the SBC to be cagey about whether they want a CCG ... if they are committed to having one and then ask what they can get for it, they are less likely to get fair value.

The correct answer for why they might desire a CCG was given in post #221.

Non sequitur ... the reasons why a conference would be cagey about wanting a CCG and the reasons why a conference would want a CCG do not have a necessary relationship.

As far as the notion that the case for a Go5 CCG hinges on offering a hefty financial profit as opposed to the kind of clear exposure benefits that Go5 schools with CCG's receive ... FBS football is not a money making exercise in the Go5 conferences, its a marketing expense. A CCG that breaks even and brings in more viewers than ever turn in to a regular season game is a strong net win.

There aren't clear exposure benefits. You have still yet to prove this, for the MAC. You only cited numbers showing that the CCG got higher ratings than some weekday games. That doesn't prove anything.

Remember folks Higher ratings and more people watching than normal do not equal greater exposure.