(09-06-2011 04:05 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  

(09-06-2011 03:45 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  While I'd like to get CUSA numbers, right now we are getting MAC numbers because we aren't producing ranked teams and they are putting 58% more people in the stands than we are.

I don't imagine anyone would expect the same amount of money as them at this point. What I have a hard time believing is that the contracts were negotiated competently as we're locked into an almost decade long deal at a value that's 1/14th what CUSA currently receives.

What happens if 3-4 years from now we start placing 2-3 teams in the top 25 yearly and get someone into a BCS bowl? Is it still, "Oh, that's nice. However, you'll only get $1 million for the remaining four years in your contract."?

Even if $1 million was the most we could possibly get at this time, why would WW lock us in for EIGHT YEARS?

First, do not blame this on WW. The school presidents have to approve the deal before it is signed off on by the agent for the school presidents (the conference commissioner). Next, you can't negotiate from the standpoint of prospective value. That is almost always impossible to quantify. It is all based upon current value spread out over a period of time, with the hope that such said value can increase over the length of the deal. That being the case, we are not in the ball park for MWC or CUSA money. However, with more games and exposure, we definitely should be, as a stable conference, grossing more per annum than the WAC will be grossing in 2012. If we are not getting those dollars, then there is something fundamentally wrong, and we potentially can lose teams to the WAC.

Free agents in pro ball get paid based on what they did last year, not so much on what they are projected to do next year unless they've had a dramatic injury.

ESPN or Fox will pay based on what they think they can make on the deal and that is based on the numbers they have in hand.

I would expect that the deal has a number of look-in provisions and if we draw better numbers, we will be able to re-open. That's pretty much how all the long-term deals are being done now.

(09-06-2011 04:14 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote:  

(09-06-2011 04:05 PM)Gakusei Wrote:  

(09-06-2011 03:45 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  While I'd like to get CUSA numbers, right now we are getting MAC numbers because we aren't producing ranked teams and they are putting 58% more people in the stands than we are.

I don't imagine anyone would expect the same amount of money as them at this point. What I have a hard time believing is that the contracts were negotiated competently as we're locked into an almost decade long deal at a value that's 1/14th what CUSA currently receives.

What happens if 3-4 years from now we start placing 2-3 teams in the top 25 yearly and get someone into a BCS bowl? Is it still, "Oh, that's nice. However, you'll only get $1 million for the remaining four years in your contract."?

Even if $1 million was the most we could possibly get at this time, why would WW lock us in for EIGHT YEARS?

First, do not blame this on WW. The school presidents have to approve the deal before it is signed off on by the agent for the school presidents (the conference commissioner). Next, you can't negotiate from the standpoint of prospective value. That is almost always impossible to quantify. It is all based upon current value spread out over a period of time, with the hope that such said value can increase over the length of the deal. That being the case, we are not in the ball park for MWC or CUSA money. However, with more games and exposure, we definitely should be, as a stable conference, grossing more per annum than the WAC will be grossing in 2012. If we are not getting those dollars, then there is something fundamentally wrong, and we potentially can lose teams to the WAC.

Agree . . do not blame the Conference Commish . . direct all blame and criticism at your own university president and AD . . the Commish cannot make such decisions and commitments without the approval of his bosses . . all SBC Presidents. Obviously the SBC Presidents like what he is doing or he would not be doing it on their behalf !!

I think WW has done a pretty good job as of late.

Haters will hate

The Pac-12 deal was worth how much?

It's astounding how much of a disparity there is among media deals.

Why doesn't that release say what's different about the new agreement? Also, does it say there will be a minimum of two games on ESPN/ESPN2 per year for the entire conference, or per team? If it's for the entire conference, then this entire agreement is a joke. The Sun Belt ought to take its chances with Fox, CBS or another entity.

Quote:The new agreement will give Sun Belt Conference football a minimum of two games on either ESPN or ESPN2 and also a minimum of five games on ESPNU that will be scheduled for Thursday or Friday nights.

Also, any school that would move a lucrative Saturday game to a Thursday or, God forbid, Friday (a sin in Alabama, Georgia and Florida) for ESPNU, which so few people see - or worse, the Web site ESPN3, must be crazy.

Finally, if each school gets $120k and must move a Saturday game to a Thursday, in effect losing half of its anticipated ticket revenue, gear sales, parking fees and the like, this seems like a major money loser.

Just say no to ESPN!

(09-07-2011 12:03 AM)BMarkey Wrote:  Why doesn't that release say what's different about the new agreement? Also, does it say there will be a minimum of two games on ESPN/ESPN2 per year for the entire conference, or per team? If it's for the entire conference, then this entire agreement is a joke. The Sun Belt ought to take its chances with Fox, CBS or another entity.

Quote:The new agreement will give Sun Belt Conference football a minimum of two games on either ESPN or ESPN2 and also a minimum of five games on ESPNU that will be scheduled for Thursday or Friday nights.

Also, any school that would move a lucrative Saturday game to a Thursday or, God forbid, Friday (a sin in Alabama, Georgia and Florida) for ESPNU, which so few people see - or worse, the Web site ESPN3, must be crazy.

Finally, if each school gets $120k and must move a Saturday game to a Thursday, in effect losing half of its anticipated ticket revenue, gear sales, parking fees and the like, this seems like a major money loser.

Just say no to ESPN!

When MT plays on a Thursday night, attendance is pretty good.

I just wish we'd put the Sunbelt regional games on another channel that's available to more households, more specifically one that's on Directv & Dish.

ESPN gives us exposure. Thursday nights etc give us a chance to have people watch the game that wouldn't normally watch the game.

(09-06-2011 05:33 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  I think WW has done a pretty good job as of late.

Haters will hate

I am one of the Haters when it comes to Wright Never makes a mistake Waters. Just like the TV deal. Wright Waters could not sell ho's to a bunch of troops on a transport!!

(09-08-2011 08:37 AM)Lafitte the Pirate Wrote:  

(09-06-2011 05:33 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  I think WW has done a pretty good job as of late.

Haters will hate

I am one of the Haters when it comes to Wright Never makes a mistake Waters. Just like the TV deal. Wright Waters could not sell ho's to a bunch of troops on a transport!!

The problem is that he's having to sell ice to eskimos. Not much demand for the product he's peddling.

(09-08-2011 07:28 PM)Raider_ATO Wrote:  

(09-08-2011 08:37 AM)Lafitte the Pirate Wrote:  

(09-06-2011 05:33 PM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  I think WW has done a pretty good job as of late.

Haters will hate

I am one of the Haters when it comes to Wright Never makes a mistake Waters. Just like the TV deal. Wright Waters could not sell ho's to a bunch of troops on a transport!!

The problem is that he's having to sell ice to eskimos. Not much demand for the product he's peddling.

Exactly. People would actually care to watch our teams if they could actually beat the Purdue's and Clemson's of the world instead of scaring them for 3 quarters. I don't care about watching ECU football, but I did care to watch in 2008 after they upset Virginia Tech and West Virginia to start out the season...

Same with Boise State. Nobody cared to watch Boise State football a few years ago. Now everyone knows they put on a good show against some of the best BCS teams, and nearly everyone wants to watch.

Wright Waters does a good job with the product we have IMO.

There are multiple ways to approach the TV strategy.

1. Go with ESPN because it has the credibility and the eyeballs watching. Go into most bars and restaurants and you know ESPN and ESPN2 are going to be on. CBS College and the Fox Regionals only if a team of local interest is on or regularly appears. Problem is unless you are top property, ESPN is going to low-ball you because they are looking for mid-week content.

2. Go with an alternate channel. MWC went with CBS College and their own network. The MTN has struggled for channel space and CBS College isn't a default channel except for the hardcore football fan. CUSA is going with Fox and even if they get a game cleared nationally (difficult to do as many of the Fox nets have obligations to local MLB, NBA, and NHL teams) you are in roughly the same number of homes as ESPNU but in some markets the local Fox Sports is a default channel for many. The alternate channel strategy will produce greater revenue but fewer viewers.

3. Alternate delivery. The Horizon League has gone this route. Their network is primarily internet delivery. Start-up costs are lower, you can control the schedule and sell a few games to ESPN. Some schools do local broadcast TV. Forget seeing games at a bar or restaurant this way anytime soon unless picked up by local cable or a satellite carrier. This is the Pac-12 third-tier model which relies on the on-demand services of Comcast, Cox, and Time-Warner.

I like the direction of the Sun Belt strategy.

We are still a national unknown so ESPN presence is vital. We push some games to the "Sun Belt Network" which is Comcast/Cox Southeast, Cox Sports, Time-Warner and others. Eventually Cox and Comcast will have to make their content available Dish, Direct, Verizon Fios, and ATT Uverse once the challenges to the FCC repealing the terrestial exception are exhausted. We are putting more games on ESPN3 so we get the Horizon League style alternate delivery. We are seeing schools starting to do local packages. Troy has done it. WKU has their Fox College thing which is a problem because ESPN despises that particular piece, Arkansas State has assembled a three station over-the-air broadcast for Central Arkansas and if it is successful I expect to see it expanded in the future. We are doing more ESPN3 games across the league. Louisiana has their local cable package.

The Sun Belt strategy isn't designed to maximize dollars but exposure and I believe it is the correct strategy given our situation.