CUSA will be renegotiating its tv contract in a couple years, and, in a rebuilding mode for the next few years, this timing seems to work favorably for CUSA, as it provides time to establish its product and public identity.

This SDSU article about the Aztec's conference revenue and the MWC finanancial situation provides a parameter, guide, and/or goal whatever for CUSA.

Regarding bowls, CUSA has done a great job in balancing its bowls geographically for its eastern teams and western teams...and will minimize bowl travel costs and hopefully won't face the difficult financial situation as SDSU experienced with Spuds Bowl.

Aztecs get $3M check; lost $88K on Bowl

Here's the thing about "losing" money on bowls.

Most of the "money losing" bowl teams end up in the red for two reasons.

1. The school goes all out to make it a huge event for the coaches, athletic administration, players and even the band and spirit groups as well as a major elbow rub event for boosters and often potential boosters, so they spend more than they really have to spend.
2. The conference captures a great deal of the revenue, puts the school on an allowance and then distributes part of that money to members who did not make it to a bowl game.

The paper in Jonesboro did an FOI of AState's bowl appearances. They noted that AState made a few thousand bucks because the Sun Belt "supplemented" our bowl revenue. But if you took the time to read the entire article what you learned was that the league captured half of our revenue and then "supplemented" our bowl earnings by giving us back part of what we made off our ticket sales. If we had kept all of what we sold, we make a comfortable profit rather than a very small profit. Basically if the AD had hosted one more cocktail party we at best break even and maybe lose a few dollars on a game where revenue would still have been enough to create a profit.

Keep that in mind next time you read about a school going to a major bowl and losing a million bucks. Rare will be the case that it would have been a money loser if the conference hadn't taken part of the money for the other members.

That article seems to say the baseline for MWC tv money seems to be $648,091 and then SDSU made $800,000 in national TV bonus money (One 500K Saturday game and one 300K weeknight)... If the MWC is only making that without the Boise State bonus system... I'm not optimistic about CUSA's upcoming media deal, as there is no marquee names within the conference to boost the contract value or encourage a television partner to offer a bonus system.

(07-11-2014 09:01 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Here's the thing about "losing" money on bowls.

Most of the "money losing" bowl teams end up in the red for two reasons.

1. The school goes all out to make it a huge event for the coaches, athletic administration, players and even the band and spirit groups as well as a major elbow rub event for boosters and often potential boosters, so they spend more than they really have to spend.
2. The conference captures a great deal of the revenue, puts the school on an allowance and then distributes part of that money to members who did not make it to a bowl game.

The paper in Jonesboro did an FOI of AState's bowl appearances. They noted that AState made a few thousand bucks because the Sun Belt "supplemented" our bowl revenue. But if you took the time to read the entire article what you learned was that the league captured half of our revenue and then "supplemented" our bowl earnings by giving us back part of what we made off our ticket sales. If we had kept all of what we sold, we make a comfortable profit rather than a very small profit. Basically if the AD had hosted one more cocktail party we at best break even and maybe lose a few dollars on a game where revenue would still have been enough to create a profit.

Keep that in mind next time you read about a school going to a major bowl and losing a million bucks. Rare will be the case that it would have been a money loser if the conference hadn't taken part of the money for the other members.

That's the big point I keep trying to get people too. A lot of this is all based on conference distribution. Even a team losses money on a bowl they are in, they are getting paid money from every other team that's in a bowl in the conference too and thus probably are making money on bowls overall.

Now if schools that stay home regularly make more than schools that go to bowls, that means a conference probably isn't dividing up the money all that well and should leave more for the schools who are actually going.

CUSA has a bowl in Hawai'i and another in the Bahamas. Two bowls that will be likely losers for the league.

As far as TV goes, I don't see a CUSA minus ECU, Tulsa, Houston, and UCF doing better than previously.

CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

C-USA sticking to the plan of larger urban schools. Old Dominion and UTSA look solid. Time will tell how the trade of SMU for North Texas, Houston for UTSA, Memphis for MTSU and ECU for Charlotte will play out. Agree on the UCF loss being the toughest.

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

They will be lucky not to take a huge cut. If the MWC teams get a base $648K then I doubt CUSA tops that.

(07-11-2014 10:02 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  CUSA has a bowl in Hawai'i and another in the Bahamas. Two bowls that will be likely losers for the league.

As far as TV goes, I don't see a CUSA minus ECU, Tulsa, Houston, and UCF doing better than previously.

You bleed money going to Hawaii. Bahamas, if you have a decent fiscally responsible plan, may not be bad. Hotels, meals, and transportation all ought to be less than Hawaii.

(07-11-2014 01:31 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

C-USA sticking to the plan of larger urban schools. Old Dominion and UTSA look solid. Time will tell how the trade of SMU for North Texas, Houston for UTSA, Memphis for MTSU and ECU for Charlotte will play out. Agree on the UCF loss being the toughest.

Charlotte comes out of a league that split $5 million 16 ways. UNT, FIU, FAU, MTSU, WKU, emerge from a league ESPN valued at a million per year. La.Tech and UTSA emerge from a league that got a million per year when Boise left. ODU comes out of the Colonial which produced even less.

The pre-CUSA value of 64% of the membership worked out to just under $1.1 million combined.

To hold the current value of the contract those nine schools have to have increase in value of just over $7.9 million combined over their previous affiliation. Even if the 9 were 100% responsible for their prior affiliation's TV value they still have to bump another $2 million.

It's going to be a huge letdown.

Hmmmm.....interesting! CUSA is getting bashed from the MWC and Nbe/AAC, both of which are convinced they are the best NonBCS conference and therefore within a hair of being designated the next BCS conference...and CUSA is getting bashed by SBC fan members whose school was not selected for CUSA.

I am a NonBCS fan, rooting for all NonBCS conferences and teams. It is sad to see the inability of the NonBCS to organize and speak with one strong voice against all the barriers thrown up against them by BCS. The NonBCS can organize and coordinate their efforts and, at the same time, MWC can say they are the best NonBCS conference and Nbe/AAC can say they are the best conference. MWC and NbeAAC saying they are the best does not preclude cooperation and organization of the NonBCS voice.

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

Speaking of ravaged, you forgot the Times Square Banners and the replacements for Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers are no where close to the ones they had before...just devasting losses.

It will all ultimately come down to data.

How were the ratings over the 3 years after realignment? That will determine what the contract amount will be.

(07-11-2014 04:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  It will all ultimately come down to data.

How were the ratings over the 3 years after realignment? That will determine what the contract amount will be.

Logic is not permitted on this board!

(07-11-2014 04:17 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(07-11-2014 10:18 AM)stever20 Wrote:  CUSA will be lucky to get as much money going forward as they are getting now. They got ravaged with realignment- with the replacements coming in are no where close to the ones they had before. Losing ECU, Tulsa, Houston, UCF- and don't forget about Memphis in basketball- just devastating losses when the replacements are much worse.

Speaking of ravaged, you forgot the Times Square Banners and the replacements for Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers are no where close to the ones they had before...just devasting losses.

And the newly negotiated AAC contract reflects a per-team dollar value that is significantly less than the old contract. Wouldn't that tend to indicate a similar outcome for CUSA? Not certain how it works, but I suspect S Miss, Marshall, UAB, Rice, and UTEP will be temporarily protected against any lost income by the exit fees of Houston, SMU, UCF, Memphis, Tulsa, Tulane, and ECU and the entry fees of the new incoming members. Im not sure if the new schools get a share of those exit fees---I have a feeling they do not. That said, its possible that the ECU, Tulsa, Tulane exit fees are treated differently than the other fees.

(07-11-2014 04:14 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Hmmmm.....interesting! CUSA is getting bashed from the MWC and Nbe/AAC, both of which are convinced they are the best NonBCS conference and therefore within a hair of being designated the next BCS conference...and CUSA is getting bashed by SBC fan members whose school was not selected for CUSA.

I am a NonBCS fan, rooting for all NonBCS conferences and teams. It is sad to see the inability of the NonBCS to organize and speak with one strong voice against all the barriers thrown up against them by BCS. The NonBCS can organize and coordinate their efforts and, at the same time, MWC can say they are the best NonBCS conference and Nbe/AAC can say they are the best conference. MWC and NbeAAC saying they are the best does not preclude cooperation and organization of the NonBCS voice.

I have yet to ever see you make a positive post for any non-AQ AAC school--maybe one day we will see it.

As for working together---I think the G5 has worked together when it works for EVERY G5. That said, the P5 is not as monolithic in their thinking as many believe. The Big-10 and Pac-12 often see things differently than the SEC and Big-12. Not surprisingly, that lack of monolithic thinking is also true of the G5. I suspect the G5 does work together when it works for everyone. The shared G5 CFP access slot and the new group of G5 bowls are two recent areas of cooperation. I think the AAC and MW have recently made statements pushing back against giving the P5 the power to change scholarship limits. I suspect the rest of the G5 feels similarly.

(07-11-2014 04:14 PM)Tallgrass Wrote:  Hmmmm.....interesting! CUSA is getting bashed from the MWC and Nbe/AAC, both of which are convinced they are the best NonBCS conference and therefore within a hair of being designated the next BCS conference...and CUSA is getting bashed by SBC fan members whose school was not selected for CUSA.

I am a NonBCS fan, rooting for all NonBCS conferences and teams. It is sad to see the inability of the NonBCS to organize and speak with one strong voice against all the barriers thrown up against them by BCS. The NonBCS can organize and coordinate their efforts and, at the same time, MWC can say they are the best NonBCS conference and Nbe/AAC can say they are the best conference. MWC and NbeAAC saying they are the best does not preclude cooperation and organization of the NonBCS voice.

If you are claiming I'm bashing you are way off base.

If you note in my "bash" I discounted the idea that the Bahamas Bowl is a money pit (because after all bashers make reasonable arguments).

There is no bashing involved in observing that if CUSA is going to retain or improve on $14 million in annual media rights payments that someone is going to have to assign significantly greater value to the 9 new members than was assigned to them previously.

But I forget this is the internet. If you don't like the message attack the messenger and try to discredit the messenger by claiming its sour grapes. That always helps further adult conversation.

I study the business of the game.

I previously explained why I thought the TV deal to lure Boise and SDSU to Big East was smoke. I pointed out that even if that deal got done at the claimed numbers that the allocation of dollars amounted to screwing the non-football members and did not think they would tolerate it.

Time validated that opinion and AAC and Big East combined deals did not produce the dollars advertised to Boise State and SDSU and further validated that the allocation of dollars under the prior deal was much closer to market value than the proposed allocation of the Super Big East.

I've discussed the C-USA deal at length in other threads and I think there are significant areas of concern.
1. Only Rice, UTEP, Marshall, USM, UAB remain of the group that garnered $14 million per year.
2. TV partner CBSS is carrying more AAC content (which contains 7 of the CUSA schools they paid $7 million a year for) and the rumormill claims ESPN is offering those games to them at a lower cost than their cost for CUSA.
3. TV partner Fox is the mystery factor here. When Fox signed CUSA there was no FS1 or FS2 and it was strictly a matter of clearing time on Fox Regionals. When the contract was signed, CUSA was the only FBS content Fox held regular season rights to for national distribution. They had Big XII and Pac-10 content but was geographically restricted in distributiing that content. Now Fox has the added channels but they also hold national distribution rights to Big XII and Pac-12 along with the new Big East and likely will get all or part of the Big 10. The circumstances for Fox have changed dramatically and what they want to do next is a big mystery to me.

(07-11-2014 04:26 PM)Niner National Wrote:  It will all ultimately come down to data.

How were the ratings over the 3 years after realignment? That will determine what the contract amount will be.

except the deal only has 2 years to go and would be negotiated next year. Probably will be redone before Charlotte even plays a game ever in football in the conference.

Yeah, I actually don't think the timing is ideal as there isn't much of a track record ratings wise...and what's there is less than stellar. Though, to be fair, FS1 is still in its' infancy. Last year, Fox opted to put 13 CUSA games on FS1 with almost half of those involving either Tulsa (4) or ECU (2). This year, they have 6 scheduled so far for FS1, but could add more later. However, there does not appear to be a minimum number of telecasts set like last year. Here's a good read on the 2014 CUSA tv schedule. Improving dollars the next go around will hinge on another bidder entering the fray (NBCSN?)