The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

I read on the main board (for what that is worth) that the schools won't get most of the exit fee money. Something about the loss of revenue with TV contract.

FWIW, the Miner fans that have been posting to various blogs and boards are wondering why they aren't in the MWC or WAC.

UTEP isn't in the WAC because that league doesn't exist for football anymore. UTEP's only options are C-USA or MWC, and as of right now the MWC doesn't want them.

(03-04-2013 11:49 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I read on the main board (for what that is worth) that the schools won't get most of the exit fee money. Something about the loss of revenue with TV contract.

Well I just had to reveal this post. The people arguing "loss of revenue" don't know what the hell they're talking about. The bylaws stipulate $500k plus that school's share of the loss of media value due to their departure (i.e., if one school left they would owe 100% of the lost value; if more than one left they would owe...well, that's my next point:)

Their position is that since CUSA has years left on our contracts, value after they leave = value before they left. Ergo, no loss and no $$. What they don't understand is that loss of market value is a number derived from network feedback and lawyers. Mostly lawyers. They work out what Memphis is worth each year and multiply that by 5. Then UCF, Houston, etc. Alternately, they provide a total loss in estimated real value (if more than one school is leaving) and the conference determines proportions.

The next question is how that is paid. The $500k is up front and typically just taken out of the next distribution. The rest is rarely paid in one big check...which is why Memphis could work out the deal they did involving surrendering basketball units. Then, the conference decides how that is distributed. Everyone assumes the incoming schools get no share and that's typically the case. But every situation is unique, contracts are made to be broken (or, rather, lawyers are made to get paid so that contracts can be broken), etc.

(03-04-2013 12:16 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 11:49 AM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:  I read on the main board (for what that is worth) that the schools won't get most of the exit fee money. Something about the loss of revenue with TV contract.

Well I just had to reveal this post. The people arguing "loss of revenue" don't know what the hell they're talking about. The bylaws stipulate $500k plus that school's share of the loss of media value due to their departure (i.e., if one school left they would owe 100% of the lost value; if more than one left they would owe...well, that's my next point:)

Their position is that since CUSA has years left on our contracts, value after they leave = value before they left. Ergo, no loss and no $$. What they don't understand is that loss of market value is a number derived from network feedback and lawyers. Mostly lawyers. They work out what Memphis is worth each year and multiply that by 5. Then UCF, Houston, etc. Alternately, they provide a total loss in estimated real value (if more than one school is leaving) and the conference determines proportions.

The next question is how that is paid. The $500k is up front and typically just taken out of the next distribution. The rest is rarely paid in one big check...which is why Memphis could work out the deal they did involving surrendering basketball units. Then, the conference decides how that is distributed. Everyone assumes the incoming schools get no share and that's typically the case. But every situation is unique, contracts are made to be broken (or, rather, lawyers are made to get paid so that contracts can be broken), etc.

As a possible point of reference?
http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=621915

Can I interject this here, too: everyone is treating Tulsa's defection as a fait accompli (and nBE fanatics treat Navy's continuing commitment the same), but the decision of the first defectors - even though it did rely on promises - was a defensible gamble. The decision by the next group, when the dysfunction of the BE had started to go public and promises of Marrinatto were officially bumpkis, was head-scratching. Tulsa deciding to join the "Conference Formally Known as Big East" would be a singularly and monumentally stupid decision...and the decision makers at Tulsa know this.

Do deep-pocketed boosters at the school "pull rank" as they did at certain other defecting schools? In this case I doubt it, but you never know. At this point, however, I would put the odds of Tulsa leaving a LOT nearer to 50% than 100%.

(03-04-2013 12:19 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote:  

blazr Wrote:Well I just had to reveal this post. The people arguing "loss of revenue" don't know what the hell they're talking about.

As a possible point of reference?
http://csnbbs.com/showthread.php?tid=621915

I would say that has the appearance of apples and oranges. Because the BE is in a negotiation window, their estimated real loss of value is clearly reflected in the actual loss of value in whatever they wind up signing (if anything). That's more black & white in public eyes than CUSA's situation which will eventually be decided in the offices of Duck, Run, & Cover, LLC.

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 08:50 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 12:04 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  Britton Banowsky said it would be like this.

Britton Banowsky may be the worst enemy this conference has.

And just what would you have done

#1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

#3. Move the conference out of South Florida.

#4. I would have brokered a swap of ECU & UTEP for La.Tech and MTSU, 8 years ago.

#5. Assign travel partners in the scheduling for all sports.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Why do you want them to go ?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

You have no answers or ideas just complaints. You sir are full of it

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 08:50 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  And just what would you have done

#1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

Everyone look! Nothing up my sleeve and no mention, in defense or judgement, of any conference commissioner...real or hypothetical.

You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? I'm fairly certain the new CEO of Yahoo! did not say during initial discussions, "Just show me what the previous CEOs did...I'll do the opposite." Correlation does not always apply...nor does causation. Put another way, the decisions of the teams planning to leave now and the ones that left in '06 might possibly, just maybe, have really boiled down to numbers on paper...most preceded by dollar signs. In any case, the vagueness of those criticisms just makes them sound ridiculous.

(03-04-2013 12:41 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 08:50 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  And just what would you have done

#1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

Everyone look! Nothing up my sleeve and no mention, in defense or judgement, of any conference commissioner...real or hypothetical.

You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? I'm fairly certain the new CEO of Yahoo! did not say during initial discussions, "Just show me what the previous CEOs did...I'll do the opposite." Correlation does not always apply...nor does causation. Put another way, the decisions of the teams planning to leave now and the ones that left in '06 might possibly, just maybe, have really boiled down to numbers on paper...most preceded by dollar signs. In any case, the vagueness of those criticisms just makes them sound ridiculous.

He is the type that would lay the blame on Ignacy Moscicki

(03-04-2013 12:41 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 08:50 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  And just what would you have done

#1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

#3. Move the conference out of South Florida.

#4. I would have brokered a swap of ECU & UTEP for La.Tech and MTSU, 8 years ago.

#5. Assign travel partners in the scheduling for all sports.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Why do you want them to go ?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

You have no answers or ideas just complaints. You sir are full of it

(03-04-2013 12:41 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 08:50 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  And just what would you have done

#1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

Everyone look! Nothing up my sleeve and no mention, in defense or judgement, of any conference commissioner...real or hypothetical.

You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? I'm fairly certain the new CEO of Yahoo! did not say during initial discussions, "Just show me what the previous CEOs did...I'll do the opposite." Correlation does not always apply...nor does causation. Put another way, the decisions of the teams planning to leave now and the ones that left in '06 might possibly, just maybe, have really boiled down to numbers on paper...most preceded by dollar signs. In any case, the vagueness of those criticisms just makes them sound ridiculous.

(03-04-2013 12:54 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 12:41 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  #1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

Everyone look! Nothing up my sleeve and no mention, in defense or judgement, of any conference commissioner...real or hypothetical.

You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? I'm fairly certain the new CEO of Yahoo! did not say during initial discussions, "Just show me what the previous CEOs did...I'll do the opposite." Correlation does not always apply...nor does causation. Put another way, the decisions of the teams planning to leave now and the ones that left in '06 might possibly, just maybe, have really boiled down to numbers on paper...most preceded by dollar signs. In any case, the vagueness of those criticisms just makes them sound ridiculous.

He is the type that would lay the blame on Ignacy Moscicki

(03-04-2013 12:41 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 08:50 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  And just what would you have done

#1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

#3. Move the conference out of South Florida.

#4. I would have brokered a swap of ECU & UTEP for La.Tech and MTSU, 8 years ago.

#5. Assign travel partners in the scheduling for all sports.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Why do you want them to go ?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

You have no answers or ideas just complaints. You sir are full of it

Yet, you quote my ideas in your post.

After ELEVEN years of C-USA success, why hasn't Banowsky been poached by a bigger conference ? Because he has done such a stellar &*#^!ng job for us.

Under his leadership, C-USA has gone from a top flight Basketball and pretty good football conference into the village bicycle. Banowsky works for us, the C-USA schools, student athletes, boosters and fans. Not the other way around. For the $910,000 a year that WE are paying him, I would expect at least one occasional public appearance in Birmingham.

I really do not like Banowsky. I think that he is at best mediocre.

That said, I don't know what anyone running C-USA could have done to keep either wave of C-USA schools from moving to the BE when they got invited. The first wave, when Louisville and the rest went, it more than made sense to jump on that invite. This last group, yes, it was risky, especially given the atmosphere regarding conference reorganization, but again, money and TV exposure.

Maybe, *maybe*, there was a way to keep the last wave... but frankly, I'm not sure what could have been said to them beyond "You're buying a pig in a poke, it's a very risky move. C-USA isn't the greatest conference, but as it stands it is stable" - which would have been BS anyhow, because with four teams looking at jumping ship it wasn't all that stable.

(03-04-2013 01:57 PM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  After ELEVEN years of C-USA success, why hasn't Banowsky been poached by a bigger conference ? Because he has done such a stellar &*#^!ng job for us.

Under his leadership, C-USA has gone from a top flight Basketball and pretty good football conference into the village bicycle.

Maybe the SEC is holding out for him to replace Mike Slive since C-USA is where they got him.

(03-04-2013 12:54 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 12:41 PM)blazr Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:53 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 10:49 AM)bladhmadh Wrote:  

(03-04-2013 09:55 AM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  #1. Do a a better job marketing C-USA.

#2. Find a way to keep Houston, Tulsa, Tulane, Memphis & SMU.

Just how would you have kept those schools from leaving?

Obviously what ever the Commish did, didn't work. So I would do the opposite of what he did.

Everyone look! Nothing up my sleeve and no mention, in defense or judgement, of any conference commissioner...real or hypothetical.

You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? I'm fairly certain the new CEO of Yahoo! did not say during initial discussions, "Just show me what the previous CEOs did...I'll do the opposite." Correlation does not always apply...nor does causation. Put another way, the decisions of the teams planning to leave now and the ones that left in '06 might possibly, just maybe, have really boiled down to numbers on paper...most preceded by dollar signs. In any case, the vagueness of those criticisms just makes them sound ridiculous.

He is the type that would lay the blame on Ignacy Moscicki

More like Stalin when the Poles ran to him for help, if that is the reference and timeframe you wish to use.

A message board poster does not have to prove that he has better ideas than the commissioner. The poster makes no claims to be an authority whereas Banowski is supposed to be qualified to do the job.

However the message poster can look at the results of his tenure and know he is not doing a good job.

FWIW, a large, currently snow-bound, Blazertalker said it would be like this for the conference over 7 years ago.

Maybe B.B. needs less to do. Like running his own bowl game.

http://www.theheartofdallas.org/about-us.php

(03-04-2013 02:38 PM)BlazerPhil Wrote:  FWIW, a large, currently snow-bound, Blazertalker said it would be like this for the conference over 7 years ago.

Flying Mouse called this one many years back too, and took much ridicule for his troubles.