Coordinators at the big schools are making more than many, if not most, G5 coaches, not just being competitive with MAC and Sun Belt head coaches' salaries. That will drive a lot of coaching talent to the big schools. There's been some speculation the decline of the Big 10 in the last few years isn't merely cyclical, but is tied to the lag in their assistant's salaries relative to the SEC and Big 12.

Facilities the lower P5 can build will help them in recruiting across sports. And the P5 label is even stronger a branding than the BCS/non-BCS was.

Its going to be tougher for the G5.

(07-17-2014 10:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:42 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Juts having money doesn't mean you increase the gap over the G5. The number of athletes available will remain the same and it is clear that you can find some of the best coaches at the G5 level. If they start tinkering with transfer rules and scholarship limits that could really throw off the competitive balance but I am not convinced that this is what anyone wants. The Chicken Little crowd thinks that the P5 want to squeeze everyone out as if that increases their bottom line. It makes more sense to want as many programs as possible to become successful and popular enough to draw in new fans and new dollars.

I could agree more with a statement like this. I don't think it's necessarily going to increase the gap.. But I just don't agree with the statement that because the G5 schools are going to make an extra million, they're going to see a huge difference. The statement that was getting made was that the million would close the gap to some degree. I just don't see that at all. Maybe within the G5 it'll close the gap some- but that's it.

The new TV contracts are what increase the gap. All of the P5 will get more national exposure and vastly more $. Just a few years ago Washington St. got $2.5 million from the Pac 10. Next year they will be getting around $30 million. The G5 schools were close behind them, but have gone up a couple million while WSU has gone up nearly $30 million. It will show up in a lot of sports, not just football.

I don't know about more exposure. They have already gotten a TON of exposure- though P12 has gotten more now than before- at better times generally speaking. But the $$$ is a huge difference now than before.

(07-17-2014 10:15 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:42 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Juts having money doesn't mean you increase the gap over the G5. The number of athletes available will remain the same and it is clear that you can find some of the best coaches at the G5 level. If they start tinkering with transfer rules and scholarship limits that could really throw off the competitive balance but I am not convinced that this is what anyone wants. The Chicken Little crowd thinks that the P5 want to squeeze everyone out as if that increases their bottom line. It makes more sense to want as many programs as possible to become successful and popular enough to draw in new fans and new dollars.

I could agree more with a statement like this. I don't think it's necessarily going to increase the gap.. But I just don't agree with the statement that because the G5 schools are going to make an extra million, they're going to see a huge difference. The statement that was getting made was that the million would close the gap to some degree. I just don't see that at all. Maybe within the G5 it'll close the gap some- but that's it.

The new TV contracts are what increase the gap. All of the P5 will get more national exposure and vastly more $. Just a few years ago Washington St. got $2.5 million from the Pac 10. Next year they will be getting around $30 million. The G5 schools were close behind them, but have gone up a couple million while WSU has gone up nearly $30 million. It will show up in a lot of sports, not just football.

I don't know about more exposure. They have already gotten a TON of exposure- though P12 has gotten more now than before- at better times generally speaking. But the $$$ is a huge difference now than before.

For the Pac 12, Big 12 and SEC, almost every broadcast is national now, instead of regional being the rule. Think the same is true of the ACC, but I'm not sure. Big 10 was already pretty much national. ESPN regional games would be mirrored on ESPN2.

(07-17-2014 10:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:15 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:42 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Juts having money doesn't mean you increase the gap over the G5. The number of athletes available will remain the same and it is clear that you can find some of the best coaches at the G5 level. If they start tinkering with transfer rules and scholarship limits that could really throw off the competitive balance but I am not convinced that this is what anyone wants. The Chicken Little crowd thinks that the P5 want to squeeze everyone out as if that increases their bottom line. It makes more sense to want as many programs as possible to become successful and popular enough to draw in new fans and new dollars.

I could agree more with a statement like this. I don't think it's necessarily going to increase the gap.. But I just don't agree with the statement that because the G5 schools are going to make an extra million, they're going to see a huge difference. The statement that was getting made was that the million would close the gap to some degree. I just don't see that at all. Maybe within the G5 it'll close the gap some- but that's it.

The new TV contracts are what increase the gap. All of the P5 will get more national exposure and vastly more $. Just a few years ago Washington St. got $2.5 million from the Pac 10. Next year they will be getting around $30 million. The G5 schools were close behind them, but have gone up a couple million while WSU has gone up nearly $30 million. It will show up in a lot of sports, not just football.

I don't know about more exposure. They have already gotten a TON of exposure- though P12 has gotten more now than before- at better times generally speaking. But the $$$ is a huge difference now than before.

For the Pac 12, Big 12 and SEC, almost every broadcast is national now, instead of regional being the rule. Think the same is true of the ACC, but I'm not sure. Big 10 was already pretty much national. ESPN regional games would be mirrored on ESPN2.

Maybe for P12 and B12, but SEC has long had a lot of games on ESPN/CBS. Like 1 CBS and 2 ESPN games a week.

(07-17-2014 10:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:15 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 09:48 AM)stever20 Wrote:  I could agree more with a statement like this. I don't think it's necessarily going to increase the gap.. But I just don't agree with the statement that because the G5 schools are going to make an extra million, they're going to see a huge difference. The statement that was getting made was that the million would close the gap to some degree. I just don't see that at all. Maybe within the G5 it'll close the gap some- but that's it.

The new TV contracts are what increase the gap. All of the P5 will get more national exposure and vastly more $. Just a few years ago Washington St. got $2.5 million from the Pac 10. Next year they will be getting around $30 million. The G5 schools were close behind them, but have gone up a couple million while WSU has gone up nearly $30 million. It will show up in a lot of sports, not just football.

I don't know about more exposure. They have already gotten a TON of exposure- though P12 has gotten more now than before- at better times generally speaking. But the $$$ is a huge difference now than before.

For the Pac 12, Big 12 and SEC, almost every broadcast is national now, instead of regional being the rule. Think the same is true of the ACC, but I'm not sure. Big 10 was already pretty much national. ESPN regional games would be mirrored on ESPN2.

Maybe for P12 and B12, but SEC has long had a lot of games on ESPN/CBS. Like 1 CBS and 2 ESPN games a week.

Yes, but a lot of the daytime ESPN games were regional.

(07-17-2014 10:47 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:30 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:15 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  The new TV contracts are what increase the gap. All of the P5 will get more national exposure and vastly more $. Just a few years ago Washington St. got $2.5 million from the Pac 10. Next year they will be getting around $30 million. The G5 schools were close behind them, but have gone up a couple million while WSU has gone up nearly $30 million. It will show up in a lot of sports, not just football.

I don't know about more exposure. They have already gotten a TON of exposure- though P12 has gotten more now than before- at better times generally speaking. But the $$$ is a huge difference now than before.

For the Pac 12, Big 12 and SEC, almost every broadcast is national now, instead of regional being the rule. Think the same is true of the ACC, but I'm not sure. Big 10 was already pretty much national. ESPN regional games would be mirrored on ESPN2.

Maybe for P12 and B12, but SEC has long had a lot of games on ESPN/CBS. Like 1 CBS and 2 ESPN games a week.

Yes, but a lot of the daytime ESPN games were regional.

true, but that was a lot of the lower tier games. And, that's going to SEC Network now- which will be pretty regional as well.

I don't see how there can be much more 'National' exposure for the P5's during their regular season. Everyone wants to play on Saturdays, so they won't play during the week, and there are basically 4 time slots (12:00, 3:30, 7:30 and 9:00). The major networks, other than ESPN, don't show college football at night so that leaves the SPN's (ESPN 2, FSN, NBCSN, Big 10 Network, etc.) to cover the bulk of the games, which they already do.

So for all intent and purposes, there are at most 10 national games a week; that's 20 teams. Everyone else gets regional SPN coverage. That doesn't look like a great amount of additional exposure for the P5's to me.

p.s. I don't think I've ever seen a live Washington St. regular season game down here in Florida and I doubt I ever will.

(07-16-2014 02:33 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:30 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  this contract is designed so that over its 12 year life span the P5 will receive $900 million MORE than the G5. Don't let any news of the G5's crumbs being slightly larger fool you, this is the most lopsided split of league revenue amongst it members in the history of all of sports. Remember this the next time some talking head complains about the G5 holding the P5 back because they can't keep up financially.

Not to mention they already have a head start with those lofty TV contracts that are paying 10-25X more per year than what any of the G5 conferences are making.

In the meantime, BCS must also be delighted by the lack of an organized and coordinated response from the NonBCS schools and conferences. Rather, Nbe/AAC fans on their board and MWC fans on their board are consumed and wasting time and energy arguing the trivial and irrelevant point as to which conference is the best NonBCS conference. It could not have played out better for BCS.

LINK: MWC HISTORICALLY BETTER THAN AAC
http://www.mwcboard.com/index.php?showtopic=54352

(07-17-2014 10:55 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  I don't see how there can be much more 'National' exposure for the P5's during their regular season. Everyone wants to play on Saturdays, so they won't play during the week, and there a basically 4 time slots (12:00, 3:30, 7:30 and 9:00). The major networks, other than ESPN, don't show college football at night so that leaves the SPN's (ESPN 2, FSN, NBCSN, Big 10 Network, etc.) to cover the bulk of the games, which they already do.

p.s. I don't think I've ever seen a live Washington St. regular season game down here in Florida and I doubt I ever will.

So for all intent and purposes, there are at most 10 national games a week; that's 20 teams. Everyone else gets regional SPN coverage. That's doesn't look like a great amount of additional exposure for the P5's to me.

Fox Sports, Fox Sports 1 and expanded use of ESPNU and ESPNNews. Throw in ESPN and ESPN2 and some on ABC, CBS and NBC and late night Pac 12 games and you are over 20, not counting TH and F. The conference networks are also now or soon available most places around the country, even if on a sports tier. And the Big East isn't getting those slots anymore (although most of them are now in the other conferences).

(07-17-2014 10:55 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  I don't see how there can be much more 'National' exposure for the P5's during their regular season. Everyone wants to play on Saturdays, so they won't play during the week, and there are basically 4 time slots (12:00, 3:30, 7:30 and 9:00). The major networks, other than ESPN, don't show college football at night so that leaves the SPN's (ESPN 2, FSN, NBCSN, Big 10 Network, etc.) to cover the bulk of the games, which they already do.

So for all intent and purposes, there are at most 10 national games a week; that's 20 teams. Everyone else gets regional SPN coverage. That doesn't look like a great amount of additional exposure for the P5's to me.

p.s. I don't think I've ever seen a live Washington St. regular season game down here in Florida and I doubt I ever will.

That's just because you either don't stay up late on Saturdays or are out partying. I've seen them several times in the last couple years in Georgia on Saturday nights.

(07-17-2014 10:58 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:33 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:30 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  this contract is designed so that over its 12 year life span the P5 will receive $900 million MORE than the G5. Don't let any news of the G5's crumbs being slightly larger fool you, this is the most lopsided split of league revenue amongst it members in the history of all of sports. Remember this the next time some talking head complains about the G5 holding the P5 back because they can't keep up financially.

Not to mention they already have a head start with those lofty TV contracts that are paying 10-25X more per year than what any of the G5 conferences are making.

In the meantime, BCS must also be delighted by the lack of an organized and coordinated response from the NonBCS schools and conferences. Rather, Nbe/AAC fans on their board and MWC fans on their board are consumed and wasting time and energy arguing the trivial and irrelevant point as to which conference is the best NonBCS conference. It could not have played out better for BCS.

LINK: MWC HISTORICALLY BETTER THAN AAC
http://www.mwcboard.com/index.php?showtopic=54352

The traditional incompetence of the Big East office killed prospects for cooperation, coupled with the gradual effort by the ACC to slowly bleed them to death. The BE took a long time to split and then added teams in bits and pieces while trying to strip the MWC. Meanwhile CUSA and MWC were trying to work something out together until there wasn't much left of CUSA.

(07-17-2014 11:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  Fox Sports, Fox Sports 1 and expanded use of ESPNU and ESPNNews. Throw in ESPN and ESPN2 and some on ABC, CBS and NBC and late night Pac 12 games and you are over 20, not counting TH and F. The conference networks are also now or soon available most places around the country, even if on a sports tier. And the Big East isn't getting those slots anymore (although most of them are now in the other conferences).

Yeah, but your counting all those channels as 'national'. I don't consider anything that's not on basic cable as national. I get nearly a thousand channels because I spend nearly $200 a month on Comcast bundling; I have a brother who has no cable and watches television over the internet. And even with all my channels, there are only 10 to 12 that I pay attention to unless I do a search for something in particular.

Point is, if you're on a national, 'basic cable', channel, then yes, you should consider it a national game. Games that are played on channels where you have to buy additional 'sports' packages to view them are not national. I don't think advertisers pay national type dollars to be viewed on these SPN's either; and that really is the bottom line.

(07-17-2014 11:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:55 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  I don't see how there can be much more 'National' exposure for the P5's during their regular season. Everyone wants to play on Saturdays, so they won't play during the week, and there are basically 4 time slots (12:00, 3:30, 7:30 and 9:00). The major networks, other than ESPN, don't show college football at night so that leaves the SPN's (ESPN 2, FSN, NBCSN, Big 10 Network, etc.) to cover the bulk of the games, which they already do.

So for all intent and purposes, there are at most 10 national games a week; that's 20 teams. Everyone else gets regional SPN coverage. That doesn't look like a great amount of additional exposure for the P5's to me.

p.s. I don't think I've ever seen a live Washington St. regular season game down here in Florida and I doubt I ever will.

That's just because you either don't stay up late on Saturdays or are out partying. I've seen them several times in the last couple years in Georgia on Saturday nights.

last year WSU was on
ESPN 3 times
FS1 3 times
ESPNU 2 times
and Fox 1 time

so 9 nationally broadcast games for WSU last year.

(07-17-2014 11:05 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:55 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  I don't see how there can be much more 'National' exposure for the P5's during their regular season. Everyone wants to play on Saturdays, so they won't play during the week, and there are basically 4 time slots (12:00, 3:30, 7:30 and 9:00). The major networks, other than ESPN, don't show college football at night so that leaves the SPN's (ESPN 2, FSN, NBCSN, Big 10 Network, etc.) to cover the bulk of the games, which they already do.
So for all intent and purposes, there are at most 10 national games a week; that's 20 teams. Everyone else gets regional SPN coverage. That doesn't look like a great amount of additional exposure for the P5's to me.
p.s. I don't think I've ever seen a live Washington St. regular season game down here in Florida and I doubt I ever will.

That's just because you either don't stay up late on Saturdays or are out partying. I've seen them several times in the last couple years in Georgia on Saturday nights.

not on a basic cable channel.

I'd call ESPN, ESPNU, FS1 basic cable channels. Oh and Fox is broadcast even.

(07-17-2014 11:10 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 10:58 AM)Tallgrass Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:33 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-16-2014 02:30 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  this contract is designed so that over its 12 year life span the P5 will receive $900 million MORE than the G5. Don't let any news of the G5's crumbs being slightly larger fool you, this is the most lopsided split of league revenue amongst it members in the history of all of sports. Remember this the next time some talking head complains about the G5 holding the P5 back because they can't keep up financially.

Not to mention they already have a head start with those lofty TV contracts that are paying 10-25X more per year than what any of the G5 conferences are making.

In the meantime, BCS must also be delighted by the lack of an organized and coordinated response from the NonBCS schools and conferences. Rather, Nbe/AAC fans on their board and MWC fans on their board are consumed and wasting time and energy arguing the trivial and irrelevant point as to which conference is the best NonBCS conference. It could not have played out better for BCS.

LINK: MWC HISTORICALLY BETTER THAN AAC
http://www.mwcboard.com/index.php?showtopic=54352

The traditional incompetence of the Big East office killed prospects for cooperation, coupled with the gradual effort by the ACC to slowly bleed them to death. The BE took a long time to split and then added teams in bits and pieces while trying to strip the MWC. Meanwhile CUSA and MWC were trying to work something out together until there wasn't much left of CUSA.

After Pitt, SU and WVU left, the AAC was:
Rutgers
Louisville
Temple
USF
Cincinnati
UConn
The MWC was
SDSU
UNM
UNLV
Air Force
CSU
Boise
Nevada
Fresno
Hawaii
Wyoming

If AAC adds UH, SMU, Memphis and UCF at that point, both have 10 teams, WAC has 7, CUSA has 8, SB 10 and WAC 13. WAC, CUSA and SB probably end up with 2 12 team conferences.

(07-17-2014 11:14 AM)stever20 Wrote:  last year WSU was on
ESPN 3 times
FS1 3 times
ESPNU 2 times
and Fox 1 time
so 9 nationally broadcast games for WSU last year.

I stand corrected then for the 3 ESPN games. I still don't consider the other games national (though I probably could have found them if I searched).

(07-17-2014 11:19 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 11:14 AM)stever20 Wrote:  last year WSU was on
ESPN 3 times
FS1 3 times
ESPNU 2 times
and Fox 1 time
so 9 nationally broadcast games for WSU last year.

I stand corrected then for the 3 ESPN games. I still don't consider the other games national (though I probably could have found them if I searched).

ESPNU is getting pretty close to national. FS1 will get better with time. Definitely at least some national broadcast exposure(way better than the previous tv deal)

(07-17-2014 11:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  ESPNU is getting pretty close to national. FS1 will get better with time. Definitely at least some national broadcast exposure(way better than the previous tv deal)

point is, if you have to buy an additional sports entertainment package to get the channels you're referencing, they're not national channels. It's very difficult to argue otherwise.

(07-17-2014 11:13 AM)FIUFan Wrote:  

(07-17-2014 11:04 AM)bullet Wrote:  Fox Sports, Fox Sports 1 and expanded use of ESPNU and ESPNNews. Throw in ESPN and ESPN2 and some on ABC, CBS and NBC and late night Pac 12 games and you are over 20, not counting TH and F. The conference networks are also now or soon available most places around the country, even if on a sports tier. And the Big East isn't getting those slots anymore (although most of them are now in the other conferences).

Yeah, but your counting all those channels as 'national'. I don't consider anything that's not on basic cable as national. I get nearly a thousand channels because I spend nearly $200 a month on Comcast bundling; I have a brother who has no cable and watches television over the internet. And even with all my channels, there are only 10 to 12 that I pay attention to unless I do a search for something in particular.

Point is, if you're on a national, 'basic cable', channel, then yes, you should consider it a national game. Games that are played on channels where you have to buy additional 'sports' packages to view them are not national. I don't think advertisers pay national type dollars to be viewed on these SPN's either; and that really is the bottom line.

None of those I mentioned except the conference networks out of market are in sports packages. They're all pretty much in the same package as ESPN2. In Atlanta, that's Digital Starter (the first level beyond the one with just local channels). ESPN News and ESPNU are in the next level up along with channels like Encore and Disney XD. You don't have to get the sports pack with all the regional networks.