(03-30-2013 12:24 PM)billings Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 05:48 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Since Boise State would be getting $2M of that $4M, and a slice of the "best conference" or "second-best conference" money for being ranked, most of the MWC didn't have much incentive to push for expanding those two pots of money.

Anyone in the MWC can get that $2 million not just Boise

If the g5 votes on how to distribute the money a small performance bonus makes sense as the Sunbelt, MAC, and CUSA wold want a more guaranteed structure with a smaller bonus then the A12 (get a name already) and MWC would want

Doesnt matter who gets it. Basically the rest of the conference is only splitting half the money. So on a year in year out basis, the more money thats split evenly works better for the aveage MW school. Frankly, the difference isnt much either way do to thier unique set up. It amounts to $166K difference to a MW school it they finish at the top or the bottom. Not really a major factor. For the typical 12 team conference the difference would be about double that--like I said, not that big a deal either way.

(03-29-2013 08:16 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  If its a flat $12 million per conference on the $60 million portion, it would be better to start dropping to 8 or 9 schools per league.

True as that would maximize this money but remember what other costs could go up by taking out schools.

12 schools by 12 million is 1 million per school. By going down to 9 you gain another $333,000. To you and me that is a lot of money but to the budgets of a FBS athletic dept. it is not very much even to a MAC school. There is a fair chance, especially to a school like UTEP where everybody is typically so far away, that you could lose most of that just in additional travel expenses since one advantage to having many teams is the ability to split into divisions to save on travel to a degree.

I guess if we really are penny pinching it would be worth it but I think we make way too much of a relative small difference in money.

(03-29-2013 08:25 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  But then the text from the link in the OP goes on to include math "(12 schools x $1M = $12M)"

Why include that if its a flat $12M?

Its not specified with any precision, but it wouldn't be surprising if its $1m per school up to $12m. If you want to go to 12 schools and a CCG, that's your prerogative, but going bigger won't be in pursuit of Access Bowl money.

(03-30-2013 12:59 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  12 schools by 12 million is 1 million per school. By going down to 9 you gain another $333,000. To you and me that is a lot of money but to the budgets of a FBS athletic dept.

Did anyone read the Idaho post? It says $1M per school. No matter how many teams your conference has.

(03-30-2013 08:21 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Did anyone read the Idaho post? It says $1M per school. No matter how many teams your conference has.

The reason people are parsing it different ways is because you have two statements that can't both be true if both are taken dead literally. $60m money to be divided among more than 60 schools, and "$1m per school", means something got to give. Its either "about" $1m per school, or $1m per school up to 12 schools per conference, or some other qualification.

(03-30-2013 08:34 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(03-30-2013 08:21 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Did anyone read the Idaho post? It says $1M per school. No matter how many teams your conference has.

The reason people are parsing it different ways is because you have two statements that can't both be true if both are taken dead literally. $60m money to be divided among more than 60 schools, and "$1m per school", means something got to give. Its either "about" $1m per school, or $1m per school up to 12 schools per conference, or some other qualification.

Agree something in that statement was off and while we may know the total dollar amount for the g5 we may not know the total to each conference based on which way you take that.

The other reason I don't think it's an even distribution across each conference is that there is an additional $12M that is split evenly across each conference that is outlined (as $2.4M per conference). Why bother having two separate amounts that are equally distributed as shares?

In the end, this is a pissing match about really nothing. The G5 are going to get anywhere from $18M-$22M each from the new playoff, plus an extra small bump for making the access bowl. The entirety of the G5 shares combined will still be less than any one of the power 5 make as a conference. Basically each G5 conference will make more from the new playoff than they will from their respective TV deals. All this really shows is that the money will be be split fairly evenly (with a difference of only a few million between the "top" G5 conference and the "bottom").

(03-31-2013 01:13 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  The other reason I don't think it's an even distribution across each conference is that there is an additional $12M that is split evenly across each conference that is outlined (as $2.4M per conference). Why bother having two separate amounts that are equally distributed as shares?

Because there aren't two separate amounts? Seriously, I don't see where you are reading that. Approximately $60 million is divided "equally" (whatever that means in this context) and $22 million is divided on a sliding scale with more going to the stronger conference.

(03-31-2013 08:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(03-31-2013 01:13 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  The other reason I don't think it's an even distribution across each conference is that there is an additional $12M that is split evenly across each conference that is outlined (as $2.4M per conference). Why bother having two separate amounts that are equally distributed as shares?

Because there aren't two separate amounts? Seriously, I don't see where you are reading that. Approximately $60 million is divided "equally" (whatever that means in this context) and $22 million is divided on a sliding scale with more going to the stronger conference.

Pretty sure the CEOs of the G5 schools, and those moving up, know the math.

Bottom line is that there is enough money to be made to entice the better FCS programs, who out draw and out perform most of the current Non-AQ programs, to join the SBC something that has not been true in the past.

(03-31-2013 01:13 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  The other reason I don't think it's an even distribution across each conference is that there is an additional $12M that is split evenly across each conference that is outlined (as $2.4M per conference). Why bother having two separate amounts that are equally distributed as shares?

In the end, this is a pissing match about really nothing. The G5 are going to get anywhere from $18M-$22M each from the new playoff, plus an extra small bump for making the access bowl. The entirety of the G5 shares combined will still be less than any one of the power 5 make as a conference. Basically each G5 conference will make more from the new playoff than they will from their respective TV deals. All this really shows is that the money will be be split fairly evenly (with a difference of only a few million between the "top" G5 conference and the "bottom").

Bob, where are you getting the information on the second evenly distributed 12 million dollar tier? The only other evenly distributed tier I'm aware of is the 10% that will be dependent on meeting minimum academic standards. Even that is not really another tier, it's included in the 82 million. It's really more 10% penalty off of your expected share than it is an additional tier of money to split. A schools forfeited 10% stays within the conference and is split by the other schools within that conference.

(03-31-2013 11:05 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2013 01:13 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  The other reason I don't think it's an even distribution across each conference is that there is an additional $12M that is split evenly across each conference that is outlined (as $2.4M per conference). Why bother having two separate amounts that are equally distributed as shares?

In the end, this is a pissing match about really nothing. The G5 are going to get anywhere from $18M-$22M each from the new playoff, plus an extra small bump for making the access bowl. The entirety of the G5 shares combined will still be less than any one of the power 5 make as a conference. Basically each G5 conference will make more from the new playoff than they will from their respective TV deals. All this really shows is that the money will be be split fairly evenly (with a difference of only a few million between the "top" G5 conference and the "bottom").

Bob, where are you getting the information on the second evenly distributed 12 million dollar tier? The only other evenly distributed tier I'm aware of is the 10% that will be dependent on meeting minimum academic standards. Even that is not really another tier, it's included in the 82 million. It's really more 10% penalty off of your expected share than it is an additional tier of money to split. A schools forfeited 10% stays within the conference and is split by the other schools within that conference.

From the link in the OP. look at the distribution based on "ranking" where the lowest rated conference gets $2.4M, and each conference ranked higher gets $1M more-$4M more with each the same .4 at the end. That means that each conference gets an equal share of $12M with an additional $10M divided up to serve as the extra for performance.

(03-31-2013 08:36 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  Bottom line is that there is enough money to be made to entice the better FCS programs, who out draw and out perform most of the current Non-AQ programs, to join the SBC something that has not been true in the past.

Yes. Being in Division 1 is already an expansive proposition ~ when UCSD commissioned a study about moving up from Div2 to Div1, the estimated additional cost of being competitive at Div1 was $28m.

But for schools that have scholarship FCS programs, the incremental costs are smaller, so boosting the Mid-Major conference payouts by $1m-$2m per school could well put some programs already closest to the size of AD required for a Mid-Major FBS program into the frame.