What say you. BYU would formally play 5 teams per year with the intent that they would join AAC if they ever should decide to join a conf. They would access our bowls but also increase AAC SOS and make it almost guaranteed AAC would get access slot every year.

no! what do we gain from that? most of our teams already play byu, not like anything would change and forcing byu on some of our teams could potentially even weaken their schedule (like smu and ecu)

we'd gain nothing from that. byu would have more to gain with an agreement of that nature

No

No

Not without more money from ESPN.
I don't see a real advantage in just having BYU on a schedule. Some schools might, but I don't see it.

I doubt Navy would favor such deal...

Yes. It makes us a better conference and costs us nothing.

(05-17-2014 03:33 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  What say you. BYU would formally play 5 teams per year with the intent that they would join AAC if they ever should decide to join a conf. They would access our bowls but also increase AAC SOS and make it almost guaranteed AAC would get access slot every year.

He'll no!

(05-17-2014 05:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yes. It makes us a better conference and costs us nothing.

how does it make us better?
we'd lose a top bowl spot every year (and theyd gt all the bowl money), wed have a team that would play spoiler to the g5 spot on a yearly basis,

how does it make us better? byu is worth a lot as a full member but not worth much as an associate

and besides what i mentioned earlier it would create turmoil in our league. navy will question why they are joining as a full football member if associate was a option (they have 3 mandatory yearly ooc a year and a lot of secondary ones they are giving up joining this league). whats stopping uconn or cincy from going indy and just being an american associate?

All or nothing with BYU. Just because we have the potential for a G5 slot for the access bowls. BYU has none. If we caved to BYU, it would snowball beyond that.

(05-17-2014 05:31 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yes. It makes us a better conference and costs us nothing.

how does it make us better?
we'd lose a top bowl spot every year (and theyd gt all the bowl money), wed have a team that would play spoiler to the g5 spot on a yearly basis,

how does it make us better? byu is worth a lot as a full member but not worth much as an associate

and besides what i mentioned earlier it would create turmoil in our league. navy will question why they are joining as a full football member if associate was a option (they have 3 mandatory yearly ooc a year and a lot of secondary ones they are giving up joining this league). whats stopping uconn or cincy from going indy and just being an american associate?

How does it make us better? Well, it can be looked at on two levels. On a conference level and at the macro level. As a conference, the 5 games they play us in football aids in our SOS and adds several more valuable games to our inventory. Additionally, their presence, with a large traveling fan base will make our conference more attractive to bowls. The addition of BYU as an Olympic member strengthens the middle of the conference and adds an attractive TV name to the inventory making basketball more valuable. Don't underestimate the value of BYU Olympic sports.

Do they take a bowl game? Yes. So what? All our bowls pretty much suck anyway. We have 7 or 8 completely interchangeable McBowls. Let them fill one. We have plenty of bowl slots--probably too many. We likely cant fill 7 or 8 a year anyway. As far as losing the bowl fee---same answer. We are not likely to fill all 7-8 bowls each season, which means are rarely getting all those bowl payouts anyway.

So, a Notre Dame style agreement improves our SOS, improves our quality football inventory for TV, improves the conference name recognition, improves ratings, improves our basketball, improves our RPI, improves our basketball TV ratings, improves our attractiveness to bowls, and builds a stronger relationship with BYU which hopefully lays the groundwork for a future full membership for BYU.

Now, what about the macro picture? The best reason for us to do a Notre Dame style agreement with BYU is that it prevents the MW from doing the same thing. If the MW offers BYU such an arrangement, they enjoy all the same benefits we would have enjoyed plus they it gives them the opportunity to lay the groundwork for future full membership in the Mountain West--thus minimizing the chance that the AAC can land BYU in future (or any other western members for that matter). Frankly, if I were the MW I would have already done this, chopping the AAC off at the knees in the west.

Ask yourself this---if it was such a horrible arrangement, why would a POWER conference offer the deal to Notre Dame?

(05-17-2014 05:31 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yes. It makes us a better conference and costs us nothing.

how does it make us better?
we'd lose a top bowl spot every year (and theyd gt all the bowl money), wed have a team that would play spoiler to the g5 spot on a yearly basis,

how does it make us better? byu is worth a lot as a full member but not worth much as an associate

and besides what i mentioned earlier it would create turmoil in our league. navy will question why they are joining as a full football member if associate was a option (they have 3 mandatory yearly ooc a year and a lot of secondary ones they are giving up joining this league). whats stopping uconn or cincy from going indy and just being an american associate?

whats to keep them from joining the mac. then we could get southern miss and another southern team. maybe gasouthern.

they paid us to join them.

(05-17-2014 06:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:31 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yes. It makes us a better conference and costs us nothing.

how does it make us better?
we'd lose a top bowl spot every year (and theyd gt all the bowl money), wed have a team that would play spoiler to the g5 spot on a yearly basis,

how does it make us better? byu is worth a lot as a full member but not worth much as an associate

and besides what i mentioned earlier it would create turmoil in our league. navy will question why they are joining as a full football member if associate was a option (they have 3 mandatory yearly ooc a year and a lot of secondary ones they are giving up joining this league). whats stopping uconn or cincy from going indy and just being an american associate?

How does it make us better? Well, it can be looked at on two levels. On a conference level and at the macro level. As a conference, the 5 games they play us in football aids in our SOS and adds several more valuable games to our inventory. Additionally, their presence, with a large traveling fan base will make our conference more attractive to bowls. The addition of BYU as an Olympic member strengthens the middle of the conference and adds an attractive TV name to the inventory making basketball more valuable. Don't underestimate the value of BYU Olympic sports.

Do they take a bowl game? Yes. So what? All our bowls pretty much suck anyway. We have 7 or 8 completely interchangeable McBowls. Let them fill one. We have plenty of bowl slots--probably too many. We likely cant fill 7 or 8 a year anyway. As far as losing the bowl fee---same answer. We are not likely to fill all 7-8 bowls each season, which means are rarely getting all those bowl payouts anyway.

So, a Notre Dame style agreement improves our SOS, improves our quality football inventory for TV, improves the conference name recognition, improves ratings, improves our basketball, improves our RPI, improves our basketball TV ratings, improves our attractiveness to bowls, and builds a stronger relationship with BYU which hopefully lays the groundwork for a future full membership for BYU.

Now, what about the macro picture? The best reason for us to do a Notre Dame style agreement with BYU is that it prevents the MW from doing the same thing. If the MW offers BYU such an arrangement, they enjoy all the same benefits we would have enjoyed plus they it gives them the opportunity to lay the groundwork for future full membership in the Mountain West--thus minimizing the chance that the AAC can land BYU in future (or any other western members for that matter). Frankly, if I were the MW I would have already done this, chopping the AAC off at the knees in the west.

Ask yourself this---if it was such a horrible arrangement, why would a POWER conference offer the deal to Notre Dame?

all your positives are irrelevant, your arguement would make sense if we werent capable of scheduling BYU like most of the ACC werent capable of getting ND at home. we ALREADY have byu as regular in our conference games, we arent increasing our SOS we are keeping it the exact same, it doesnt improve our tv inventory its the exact same.

and yes we have crappy bowls, only 2 to 3 with p5 a year, we add byu in an agreement they will get one of those yearly as the influential bowls will call for it. we'd make our bowl line up dramatically worse.

im not worried about byu joining the MWC enough to hinder our league, if they feel like that whats best for them let them do it

"Ask yourself this---if it was such a horrible arrangement, why would a POWER conference offer the deal to Notre Dame?"
and in what world are you comparing ND to BYU. it makes sense for huge name like ND (byu is no ND), EVERY SINGLE ND game is on national television (abc/nbc/cbs) a 1 loss byu and an undefeated Houston was put on espnnews last year. half of the acc would NEVER have been able to schedule ND at home, this gives them that opportunity. every single AAC team can schedule BYU without a problem. BYU 's entire tv deal is worth 4mil, the 2-3 acc controlled ND games a year was worth 17mil a year to the acc. the acc had zero percent chance at ND as full member (ND would have choosen the big 10) if byu was forced to pick today theyd choose the AAC as they feel they are beyond the mwc

you have dramrically overvalued byu, i consider them on the level of Arizona or Arizona state, youd really really want them in your conference but they arent special enough that you give the special deals basically putting them above the rest of the league.

no thank you this is bad idea

(05-17-2014 06:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:31 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yes. It makes us a better conference and costs us nothing.

how does it make us better?
we'd lose a top bowl spot every year (and theyd gt all the bowl money), wed have a team that would play spoiler to the g5 spot on a yearly basis,

how does it make us better? byu is worth a lot as a full member but not worth much as an associate

and besides what i mentioned earlier it would create turmoil in our league. navy will question why they are joining as a full football member if associate was a option (they have 3 mandatory yearly ooc a year and a lot of secondary ones they are giving up joining this league). whats stopping uconn or cincy from going indy and just being an american associate?

How does it make us better? Well, it can be looked at on two levels. On a conference level and at the macro level. As a conference, the 5 games they play us in football aids in our SOS and adds several more valuable games to our inventory. Additionally, their presence, with a large traveling fan base will make our conference more attractive to bowls. The addition of BYU as an Olympic member strengthens the middle of the conference and adds an attractive TV name to the inventory making basketball more valuable. Don't underestimate the value of BYU Olympic sports.

Do they take a bowl game? Yes. So what? All our bowls pretty much suck anyway. We have 7 or 8 completely interchangeable McBowls. Let them fill one. We have plenty of bowl slots--probably too many. We likely cant fill 7 or 8 a year anyway. As far as losing the bowl fee---same answer. We are not likely to fill all 7-8 bowls each season, which means are rarely getting all those bowl payouts anyway.

So, a Notre Dame style agreement improves our SOS, improves our quality football inventory for TV, improves the conference name recognition, improves ratings, improves our basketball, improves our RPI, improves our basketball TV ratings, improves our attractiveness to bowls, and builds a stronger relationship with BYU which hopefully lays the groundwork for a future full membership for BYU.

Now, what about the macro picture? The best reason for us to do a Notre Dame style agreement with BYU is that it prevents the MW from doing the same thing. If the MW offers BYU such an arrangement, they enjoy all the same benefits we would have enjoyed plus they it gives them the opportunity to lay the groundwork for future full membership in the Mountain West--thus minimizing the chance that the AAC can land BYU in future (or any other western members for that matter). Frankly, if I were the MW I would have already done this, chopping the AAC off at the knees in the west.

Ask yourself this---if it was such a horrible arrangement, why would a POWER conference offer the deal to Notre Dame?

Great post.

If we don't offer BYU, the mw will.

Guaranteed folks.

The only break I would give them would be come on in for football only and keep your tv contract until it runs out then its part of the league tv contract.

(05-17-2014 08:08 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Great post.

If we don't offer BYU, the mw will.

Guaranteed folks.

most of the mwc is already bitter at byu for leaving,

half of the mwc were full time conference mates with byu for ages,
the mwc will never offer them an agreement like that

it like growing up your entire life with someone then them ditching because they think they are better than you,would you offer them a special deal that says they are better than the rest?

the mountain west will offer them more money and uneven revenue sharing but thats as far as it goes or they risk boise doing the same

(05-17-2014 08:08 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 06:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:31 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-17-2014 05:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Yes. It makes us a better conference and costs us nothing.

how does it make us better?
we'd lose a top bowl spot every year (and theyd gt all the bowl money), wed have a team that would play spoiler to the g5 spot on a yearly basis,

how does it make us better? byu is worth a lot as a full member but not worth much as an associate

and besides what i mentioned earlier it would create turmoil in our league. navy will question why they are joining as a full football member if associate was a option (they have 3 mandatory yearly ooc a year and a lot of secondary ones they are giving up joining this league). whats stopping uconn or cincy from going indy and just being an american associate?

How does it make us better? Well, it can be looked at on two levels. On a conference level and at the macro level. As a conference, the 5 games they play us in football aids in our SOS and adds several more valuable games to our inventory. Additionally, their presence, with a large traveling fan base will make our conference more attractive to bowls. The addition of BYU as an Olympic member strengthens the middle of the conference and adds an attractive TV name to the inventory making basketball more valuable. Don't underestimate the value of BYU Olympic sports.

Do they take a bowl game? Yes. So what? All our bowls pretty much suck anyway. We have 7 or 8 completely interchangeable McBowls. Let them fill one. We have plenty of bowl slots--probably too many. We likely cant fill 7 or 8 a year anyway. As far as losing the bowl fee---same answer. We are not likely to fill all 7-8 bowls each season, which means are rarely getting all those bowl payouts anyway.

So, a Notre Dame style agreement improves our SOS, improves our quality football inventory for TV, improves the conference name recognition, improves ratings, improves our basketball, improves our RPI, improves our basketball TV ratings, improves our attractiveness to bowls, and builds a stronger relationship with BYU which hopefully lays the groundwork for a future full membership for BYU.

Now, what about the macro picture? The best reason for us to do a Notre Dame style agreement with BYU is that it prevents the MW from doing the same thing. If the MW offers BYU such an arrangement, they enjoy all the same benefits we would have enjoyed plus they it gives them the opportunity to lay the groundwork for future full membership in the Mountain West--thus minimizing the chance that the AAC can land BYU in future (or any other western members for that matter). Frankly, if I were the MW I would have already done this, chopping the AAC off at the knees in the west.

Ask yourself this---if it was such a horrible arrangement, why would a POWER conference offer the deal to Notre Dame?

all your positives are irrelevant, your arguement would make sense if we werent capable of scheduling BYU like most of the ACC werent capable of getting ND at home. we ALREADY have byu as regular in our conference games, we arent increasing our SOS we are keeping it the exact same, it doesnt improve our tv inventory its the exact same.

and yes we have crappy bowls, only 2 to 3 with p5 a year, we add byu in an agreement they will get one of those yearly as the influential bowls will call for it. we'd make our bowl line up dramatically worse.

im not worried about byu joining the MWC enough to hinder our league, if they feel like that whats best for them let them do it

"Ask yourself this---if it was such a horrible arrangement, why would a POWER conference offer the deal to Notre Dame?"
and in what world are you comparing ND to BYU. it makes sense for huge name like ND (byu is no ND), EVERY SINGLE ND game is on national television (abc/nbc/cbs) a 1 loss byu and an undefeated Houston was put on espnnews last year. half of the acc would NEVER have been able to schedule ND at home, this gives them that opportunity. every single AAC team can schedule BYU without a problem. BYU 's entire tv deal is worth 4mil, the 2-3 acc controlled ND games a year was worth 17mil a year to the acc. the acc had zero percent chance at ND as full member (ND would have choosen the big 10) if byu was forced to pick today theyd choose the AAC as they feel they are beyond the mwc

you have dramrically overvalued byu, i consider them on the level of Arizona or Arizona state, youd really really want them in your conference but they arent special enough that you give the special deals basically putting them above the rest of the league.

no thank you this is bad idea

Nobody really knows what BYU's contract is worth (its not public). From what I have read and heard, its a per game deal. It pays about 1 million a game for ESPN games, less for the appearances on other ESPN2 and ESPN-U. I believe ESPN is contractually required to broadcast at least 4 games---that's where the 4 million comes from. The contract is probably closer to 6 million since ESPN always takes more than 4 games. There is no AAC team getting 6 million for its media rights. BYU averages 60K+ for their football games. BYU is the top G5 target. If BYU wasn't such a pain they would be a P5 school. As for giving a special deal---we have already done that. Navy has a special deal. Navy was promised that joining the AAC would be revenue neutral. That means the Army-Navy game is not going to be included in the the AAC TV package. That's a special deal. Frankly, its a reasonable accommodation and I have no issue with it. Just like I would have no issue with a Notre Dame deal with BYU.

As for the fact we already schedule BYU---We ARE scheduling BYU, but not as much as the MW. Over the next 3 years only 3 BYU games would be played in AAC stadiums. Thus only 3 are part of the AAC inventory over the next 3 years--about one a year. What Im suggesting would put 2 or 3 A YEAR into the AAC inventory--plus ESPN could count on those games when Aresco is renegotiating the AAC contract in a few years because BYU would be CONTRACTUALLY bound to schedule 5 games vs the AAC. The rest of the stuff you are whining about doesn't cost us a dime. There is no down side. I mean if you don't care if the MW gets BYU, then sure--it doesn't matter. But frankly, if the MW gets BYU, its a game changer. To be fair, Im biased on this as I believe a western division with 4 MW teams would be a very valuable---but that's not necessarily an opinion that everyone agrees with here.


Number of games vs BYU for the AAC and MW over the next 3 seasons (BYU season 3 is not completely scheduled). The number of AAC home games vs BYU is in parenthesis.

2014

AAC-3 (2) MW-4

2015

AAC-3 (0) MW-5

2016

AAC-1 (1) MW-2

Mixed Emotions... With the P5 openly stating that BYU is not in the club. I'd say that we may not need to go full ND/ACC contract with them. I have no problem giving them a special deal but not quite as sweet as ND.

A couple months ago, I would have said yes. With the P5/G5 thing getting worse and worse, BYU gets closer to joining a conference.

If this happens, Uconn fans are adamant that they get to keep more of their tv revenue too.

Just a pandora's box.