http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ue-sharing

Looks like they are taking a three "tiered" approach.

In this proposed system, more than half the group's roughly $86-million playoff pot would be distributed among the Big East, Mountain West, Mid-American Conference, Conference USA and Sun Belt as guaranteed base shares, according to a source with direct knowledge of the discussions. The source expects those shares to be evenly split, but added discussions are ongoing.

The second tier pays out based on a conference's body of work -- the top conference gets the highest amount, then “X” amount for the next-rated conference, and on down.

The third tier pays a kicker to the conference with the highest-ranked team, which is guaranteed an access bowl bid or, if among the top-four teams in the country, a semifinal berth in the playoff.



One other tidbit we already know:

"Tulsa is an attractive candidate inside Big East offices to pair with Navy as a 12th team in 2015, one league source said."


.

"The source expects those shares to be evenly split.." Evenly split per team or per league? C-USA has more teams, so we could get less each if it is evenly split per league.

(01-23-2013 09:35 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  "The source expects those shares to be evenly split.." Evenly split per team or per league? C-USA has more teams, so we could get less each if it is evenly split per league.

I would think by conference.

Maybe the conference can then divide up the shares so that bowl teams get a higher % of the money than teams that are bad.

That would probably be the best way to do it, that way it incentivizes teams in the conference to invest in being as competitive as possible.

(01-23-2013 09:44 AM)Niner National Wrote:  I would think by conference.

Maybe the conference can then divide up the shares so that bowl teams get a higher % of the money than teams that are bad.

That would probably be the best way to do it, that way it incentivizes teams in the conference to invest in being as competitive as possible.

All CUSA revenue is evenly split with the teams. Splitting unevenly causes big turmoil and unhappiness.

More teams gives a conference a slightly better chance at having the "best" Go5 team, and also the "best" conference overall by eliminating some parity that conferences with round robin schedules have. It's a give and take on the amount of teams.

In the end it's all peanuts compared to what the Big 5 conferences get.

(01-23-2013 09:35 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  "The source expects those shares to be evenly split.." Evenly split per team or per league? C-USA has more teams, so we could get less each if it is evenly split per league.

That's the kicker. This is going to get interesting. If its per conference then expansion likely comes to a grinding halt and teams on the outside hoping to move up get left out for good.

This could go a lot of different directions....

If its shared per conference, I could even see a scenario where the financial benefit of having one less conference to split revenue with may entice the BE, MWC, and CUSA working together in some fashion to put an end to the Sunbelt as an FBS football conference.

Could be per league. Only half the money is split that way.

The other half being divided based on highest ranked team and conference performance is what C-USA needs to focus on. We can't go 2-7 against the Belt every year or we'll be at the bottom of the totem pole.

(01-23-2013 09:53 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(01-23-2013 09:35 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  "The source expects those shares to be evenly split.." Evenly split per team or per league? C-USA has more teams, so we could get less each if it is evenly split per league.

That's the kicker. This is going to get interesting. If its per conference then expansion likely comes to a grinding halt and teams on the outside hoping to move up get left out for good.

Good point. If I am a fan of App State, JMU, or Ga Southern, I'm quite worried right now.

Yupp. It means the Belt isn't going past 10.

The move ups need to stop because it will cost the rest of us money. If this were not the case let them move up but it is and will cost us. Yes Marshall moved up at one time but things were different at that time TV did not rule like it does today. And if the rumors are true with all the big guys going to 16 the belt will be gone

So what your saying is quit worrying about what conference your in and start focusing on winning and dominating your conference?

(01-23-2013 10:02 AM)goherd17 Wrote:  The move ups need to stop because it will cost the rest of us money. If this were not the case let them move up but it is and will cost us. Yes Marshall moved up at one time but things were different at that time TV did not rule like it does today. And if the rumors are true with all the big guys going to 16 the belt will be gone

Precisely. This is dead on.

As for the revenue distribution here's a key factor to keep in mind. Only half will be shared equally. Most of the remaining half will go to the higher rated conference. Your chances of having a higher rated conference increase with larger membership. Yes, we're going to get less per school than a smaller conference in base shares, but C-USA will have a higher probability of being a higher ranked conference with more teams. So, it is a bit of a Catch 22.

It would behoove C-USA to take no further Sun Belt schools. Because if we do all that's going to do is force them to bring up more I-AA's who cut into everyone's pie. It looks like the playoff revenue is going to be better than (or at least no worse) than we're going to get on TV revenue, so now the thought process has to shift a little bit. C-USA will work at 14 schools (because we're going to have a chance to be one of the top two football conferences out of the Gang of Five) but we should not get any bigger and we definitely should not add a Sun Belt school if Tulsa leaves, for example.

(01-23-2013 10:08 AM)cyc46 Wrote:  So what your saying is quit worrying about what conference your in and start focusing on winning and dominating your conference?

That's exactly what that means.

(01-23-2013 10:15 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(01-23-2013 10:02 AM)goherd17 Wrote:  The move ups need to stop because it will cost the rest of us money. If this were not the case let them move up but it is and will cost us. Yes Marshall moved up at one time but things were different at that time TV did not rule like it does today. And if the rumors are true with all the big guys going to 16 the belt will be gone

Precisely. This is dead on.

As for the revenue distribution here's a key factor to keep in mind. Only half will be shared equally. Most of the remaining half will go to the higher rated conference. Your chances of having a higher rated conference increase with larger membership. Yes, we're going to get less per school than a smaller conference in base shares, but C-USA will have a higher probability of being a higher ranked conference with more teams. So, it is a bit of a Catch 22.

It would behoove C-USA to take no further Sun Belt schools. Because if we do all that's going to do is force them to bring up more I-AA's who cut into everyone's pie. It looks like the playoff revenue is going to be better than (or at least no worse) than we're going to get on TV revenue, so now the thought process has to shift a little bit. C-USA will work at 14 schools (because we're going to have a chance to be one of the top two football conferences out of the Gang of Five) but we should not get any bigger and we definitely should not add a Sun Belt school if Tulsa leaves, for example.

Good points. Absolutely no reason for CUSA to go beyond 14 now. If I'm in the Sunbelt, I'd be really worried right now for the long term.

A couple of other thoughts. This pretty much dooms Idaho's football program. There isn't anyone the MWC can add that will increase TV and not decrease other revenue. MWC is done. They will not expand beyond 12 now.

Troy and ULM's future look bleak. They could very well end up like Idaho.

We're on our way to at least one less conference, but I'm afraid because these things happen in acts rather than all at once we're going to end up with more I-AA call ups that are going to continue to kill our revenue numbers. If the Big 12 is going to expand and the ACC is going to take UConn, Cincy, etc the sooner it can happen the better and it needs to happen all at once. If they drag all this out it's going to kill the rest of us.

(01-23-2013 09:58 AM)Niner National Wrote:  

(01-23-2013 09:53 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(01-23-2013 09:35 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  "The source expects those shares to be evenly split.." Evenly split per team or per league? C-USA has more teams, so we could get less each if it is evenly split per league.

That's the kicker. This is going to get interesting. If its per conference then expansion likely comes to a grinding halt and teams on the outside hoping to move up get left out for good.

Good point. If I am a fan of App State, JMU, or Ga Southern, I'm quite worried right now.

No doubt. Its a good thing that ODU and Charlotte got in while they could. This is not looking good for any FCS school wanting to move up. With these new agreements in place, the door is closing fast.


This is huge news.

I agree with this for the most part but it does somewhat ignore the domino effect. If there is a major change in the Big 12 or ACC's membership that filters down it will either force the Sun Belt out of business or put them on the offensive to bring up more I-AA's. That's why I'm worried about the incremental way realignment takes place. If it's one or two schools here; one or two there then the Sun Belt stays alive and hurts everyone else in the Gang of Five. If there is a sudden shift by the Big Ten and Big 12 to expand at the same time then the dominoes probably crush the Sun Belt but there's no way to know which way it will happen. But I have a hunch.

(01-23-2013 10:38 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  I agree with this for the most part but it does somewhat ignore the domino effect. If there is a major change in the Big 12 or ACC's membership that filters down it will either force the Sun Belt out of business or put them on the offensive to bring up more I-AA's. That's why I'm worried about the incremental way realignment takes place. If it's one or two schools here; one or two there then the Sun Belt stays alive and hurts everyone else in the Gang of Five. If there is a sudden shift by the Big Ten and Big 12 to expand at the same time then the dominoes probably crush the Sun Belt but there's no way to know which way it will happen. But I have a hunch.

I dont think the Sunbelt survives.

(01-23-2013 09:35 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  "The source expects those shares to be evenly split.." Evenly split per team or per league? C-USA has more teams, so we could get less each if it is evenly split per league.

In the current BCS agreement, the non-AQ split one portion equally BY CONFERENCE, each league gets the same dollar figure. An additional portion is divided based on performance. Top league takes 5 shares, next takes 4, then 3, then 2, then 1.

The Rich 5 also share by CONFERENCE not per team.

Thank you for again pointing that out. The new playoff system however is not the current BCS system.

All things considered I'll take $200,000 less in base share to get $1 million more in tv money, more bowl tie-ins, and more NCAA tourney credits.