(03-08-2015 11:37 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:33 AM)TUBballJunkie Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 10:02 AM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  this one is a no brainer easy answer for me:

stick with ESPN and get more money from them

Agreed.

We've got the SEC, Big 10 and PAC 12 networks. Oklahomans weren't clamoring for them from our cable providers, I tell you that. We just got stuck with them.

I remember just one specific time I've watched any of them, and it's only bc the football game on SEC was also on espn3 bc of that partnership. Otherwise I'm only watching these league contests on main networks.

IMHO the espn exposure is essential for our league.

I called it in my last post and I'm calling it again here.....ESPiN will be looking to strip that exposure clause from any contract we get at the first opportunity they get.

And replace the AAC with what? The SEC network has drained some college inventory from the other ESPN networks. The planned ACC network has the potetnital to do the same. The Big-10 Network will likely be increasing its share of Big-10 inventory to increase its carriage rate and the Big-10 could very well leave ESPN for Fox or NBC (have to see how the negotiations go in 2016). So---who else is going to fill those vacant slots? The MAC? The Sunbelt? CUSA? My guess is the AAC has a place in the ESPN line-up. Yeah---we are filler----but we are better filler than anything else available.

On the other side of the aisle, the AAC could finally do what it wanted to in 2012. It could maximize its media value by splitting its inventory in to packages that it sells to multiple networks. Networks get what they need, without getting stuck with stuff they don't want. Each network pays less than it would for the whole ACC package, but added together, the multiple contracts combine for more than the AAC would have received from any one network. One of ESPN, one for NBC, and perhaps a 3rd package for CBS-Sports or Fox-Sports--or even a non-traditional outlet like Netflix.

Truth is---there is no official "look in". Aresco has said so several times. However, a "look in" can happen anytime ESPN is interested in extending the contract. The MAC commissioner literally hounded ESPN for years before successfully upgrading their contract early. My guess is any renegotiation happens in year 4 or doesn't happen all. Two years prior to expiration is when ESPN extension offer to the old Big East. If they make a 6-8 million per team offer---its a no brainer to take it. If not, we probably wait until the contract expires and go onto the open market----this time with no right of refusal for ESPN.

(03-08-2015 03:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:37 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:33 AM)TUBballJunkie Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 10:02 AM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  this one is a no brainer easy answer for me:

stick with ESPN and get more money from them

Agreed.

We've got the SEC, Big 10 and PAC 12 networks. Oklahomans weren't clamoring for them from our cable providers, I tell you that. We just got stuck with them.

I remember just one specific time I've watched any of them, and it's only bc the football game on SEC was also on espn3 bc of that partnership. Otherwise I'm only watching these league contests on main networks.

IMHO the espn exposure is essential for our league.

I called it in my last post and I'm calling it again here.....ESPiN will be looking to strip that exposure clause from any contract we get at the first opportunity they get.

lol... and replace them with what? The SEC network has taken college inventory from the other ESPN networks. An ACC network has the potetnital to do the same. The Big-10 Network will likely be increasing its share of Big-10 inventory to increase its value and the Big-10 is likely moving more of whats left to Fox (have to see how the negotiations go in 2016). So---who else is going to fill those slots?

On the other side of the aisle, the AAC could finally do what it wanted to in 2012. It could maximize its media value by splitting its inventory in to packages that it sells to multiple outlets. One of ESPN, one for NBC, and perhaps a 3rd package for CBS-Sports or Fox-Sports.

Truth is---there is no official "look in". Aresco has said so several times. However, a "look in" can happen anytime ESPN is interested in extending the contract. The MAC commissioner literally hounded ESPN for years before successfully upgrading their contract early. My guess is any renegotiation happens in year 4 or doesn't happen all. Two years prior to expiration is when ESPN extension offer to the old Big East. If they make a 6-8 million per team offer---its a no brainer to take it. If not, we probably wait until the contract expires and go onto the open market----this time with no right of refusal for ESPN.

Perhaps I wrote in a different language. Let me try again. ESPiN will attempt to strip the exposure clause from the current AAC contract, when said contract comes up for it's "look-in". There is no doubt in my mind that happens, successfully or not. If they don't get it stripped at the "look-in", they will attempt to remove it at the time of renewal. Again, there's no doubt in my mind this will happen. Successfully, or not.

Just so you and others are clear.....THIS IS CONCERNING THE AAC CONTRACT!!

(03-08-2015 03:52 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:37 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:33 AM)TUBballJunkie Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 10:02 AM)ECMAN79 Wrote:  this one is a no brainer easy answer for me:

stick with ESPN and get more money from them

Agreed.

We've got the SEC, Big 10 and PAC 12 networks. Oklahomans weren't clamoring for them from our cable providers, I tell you that. We just got stuck with them.

I remember just one specific time I've watched any of them, and it's only bc the football game on SEC was also on espn3 bc of that partnership. Otherwise I'm only watching these league contests on main networks.

IMHO the espn exposure is essential for our league.

I called it in my last post and I'm calling it again here.....ESPiN will be looking to strip that exposure clause from any contract we get at the first opportunity they get.

lol... and replace them with what? The SEC network has taken college inventory from the other ESPN networks. An ACC network has the potetnital to do the same. The Big-10 Network will likely be increasing its share of Big-10 inventory to increase its value and the Big-10 is likely moving more of whats left to Fox (have to see how the negotiations go in 2016). So---who else is going to fill those slots?

On the other side of the aisle, the AAC could finally do what it wanted to in 2012. It could maximize its media value by splitting its inventory in to packages that it sells to multiple outlets. One of ESPN, one for NBC, and perhaps a 3rd package for CBS-Sports or Fox-Sports.

Truth is---there is no official "look in". Aresco has said so several times. However, a "look in" can happen anytime ESPN is interested in extending the contract. The MAC commissioner literally hounded ESPN for years before successfully upgrading their contract early. My guess is any renegotiation happens in year 4 or doesn't happen all. Two years prior to expiration is when ESPN extension offer to the old Big East. If they make a 6-8 million per team offer---its a no brainer to take it. If not, we probably wait until the contract expires and go onto the open market----this time with no right of refusal for ESPN.

Perhaps I wrote in a different language. Let me try again. ESPiN will attempt to strip the exposure clause from the current AAC contract, when said contract comes up for it's "look-in". There is no doubt in my mind that happens, successfully or not. If they don't get it stripped at the "look-in", they will attempt to remove it at the time of renewal. Again, there's no doubt in my mind this will happen. Successfully, or not.

Just so you and others are clear.....THIS IS CONCERNING THE AAC CONTRACT!!

To be clear---I am talking about the AAC contract. WThe point I was trying to make is that ESPN has room for all these games now. The problem I am pointing out is that the power conferences are building their own networks that are pulling potential inventory from ESPN, and placing them on these other networks. In other words, the pool of other games to show is shrinking---not expanding. So, there really isn't much else to show if they pull our stuff off the air---thus there isn't much reason to pull our upgraded exposure.

Frankly, I think its a bad move for the AAC to renegotiate early. We have every game on national TV for the next 6 years. Due to this exposure, every year we become more well known and more recognized as a national TV level product.

At the end of this contract---we will likely be marketing a better known more recognizable product than we are now. In fact, every year that passes, we become more recognized and more valuable. Truth be told---the only reason ESPN would renegotiate early is because they think it will save them money in the long run. That means we make less over the long haul. I'd preach patience on this front.

(03-08-2015 04:00 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:52 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:37 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:33 AM)TUBballJunkie Wrote:  Agreed.

We've got the SEC, Big 10 and PAC 12 networks. Oklahomans weren't clamoring for them from our cable providers, I tell you that. We just got stuck with them.

I remember just one specific time I've watched any of them, and it's only bc the football game on SEC was also on espn3 bc of that partnership. Otherwise I'm only watching these league contests on main networks.

IMHO the espn exposure is essential for our league.

I called it in my last post and I'm calling it again here.....ESPiN will be looking to strip that exposure clause from any contract we get at the first opportunity they get.

lol... and replace them with what? The SEC network has taken college inventory from the other ESPN networks. An ACC network has the potetnital to do the same. The Big-10 Network will likely be increasing its share of Big-10 inventory to increase its value and the Big-10 is likely moving more of whats left to Fox (have to see how the negotiations go in 2016). So---who else is going to fill those slots?

On the other side of the aisle, the AAC could finally do what it wanted to in 2012. It could maximize its media value by splitting its inventory in to packages that it sells to multiple outlets. One of ESPN, one for NBC, and perhaps a 3rd package for CBS-Sports or Fox-Sports.

Truth is---there is no official "look in". Aresco has said so several times. However, a "look in" can happen anytime ESPN is interested in extending the contract. The MAC commissioner literally hounded ESPN for years before successfully upgrading their contract early. My guess is any renegotiation happens in year 4 or doesn't happen all. Two years prior to expiration is when ESPN extension offer to the old Big East. If they make a 6-8 million per team offer---its a no brainer to take it. If not, we probably wait until the contract expires and go onto the open market----this time with no right of refusal for ESPN.

Perhaps I wrote in a different language. Let me try again. ESPiN will attempt to strip the exposure clause from the current AAC contract, when said contract comes up for it's "look-in". There is no doubt in my mind that happens, successfully or not. If they don't get it stripped at the "look-in", they will attempt to remove it at the time of renewal. Again, there's no doubt in my mind this will happen. Successfully, or not.

Just so you and others are clear.....THIS IS CONCERNING THE AAC CONTRACT!!

To be clear---I am talking about the AAC contract. WThe point I was trying to make is that ESPN has room for all these games now. The problem I am pointing out is that the power conferences are building their own networks that are pulling potential inventory from ESPN, and placing them on these other networks. In other words, the pool of other games to show is shrinking---not expanding. So, there really isn't much else to show if they pull our stuff off the air---thus there isn't much reason to pull our upgraded exposure.

Frankly, I think its a bad move for the AAC to renegotiate early. We have every game on national TV for the next 6 years. Due to this exposure, every year we become more well known and more recognized as a national TV level product.

At the end of this contract---we will likely be marketing a better known more recognizable product than we are now. In fact, every year that passes, we become more recognized and more valuable. Truth be told---the only reason ESPN would renegotiate early is because they think it will save them money in the long run. That means we make less over the long haul. I'd preach patience on this front.

Not quite agreeing that the ESPN inventory is going away anytime soon with P5 networks. The theory is it would move games from ESPN 3 not ESPN. For example if the ACC network happens, the game would probably be lost is the Raycom game not the ESPN. Now the AAC might be able to get a Raycom deal for games for tier 3. I think that would be a better move than an AAC network.

(03-08-2015 04:10 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 04:00 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:52 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:37 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  I called it in my last post and I'm calling it again here.....ESPiN will be looking to strip that exposure clause from any contract we get at the first opportunity they get.

lol... and replace them with what? The SEC network has taken college inventory from the other ESPN networks. An ACC network has the potetnital to do the same. The Big-10 Network will likely be increasing its share of Big-10 inventory to increase its value and the Big-10 is likely moving more of whats left to Fox (have to see how the negotiations go in 2016). So---who else is going to fill those slots?

On the other side of the aisle, the AAC could finally do what it wanted to in 2012. It could maximize its media value by splitting its inventory in to packages that it sells to multiple outlets. One of ESPN, one for NBC, and perhaps a 3rd package for CBS-Sports or Fox-Sports.

Truth is---there is no official "look in". Aresco has said so several times. However, a "look in" can happen anytime ESPN is interested in extending the contract. The MAC commissioner literally hounded ESPN for years before successfully upgrading their contract early. My guess is any renegotiation happens in year 4 or doesn't happen all. Two years prior to expiration is when ESPN extension offer to the old Big East. If they make a 6-8 million per team offer---its a no brainer to take it. If not, we probably wait until the contract expires and go onto the open market----this time with no right of refusal for ESPN.

Perhaps I wrote in a different language. Let me try again. ESPiN will attempt to strip the exposure clause from the current AAC contract, when said contract comes up for it's "look-in". There is no doubt in my mind that happens, successfully or not. If they don't get it stripped at the "look-in", they will attempt to remove it at the time of renewal. Again, there's no doubt in my mind this will happen. Successfully, or not.

Just so you and others are clear.....THIS IS CONCERNING THE AAC CONTRACT!!

To be clear---I am talking about the AAC contract. WThe point I was trying to make is that ESPN has room for all these games now. The problem I am pointing out is that the power conferences are building their own networks that are pulling potential inventory from ESPN, and placing them on these other networks. In other words, the pool of other games to show is shrinking---not expanding. So, there really isn't much else to show if they pull our stuff off the air---thus there isn't much reason to pull our upgraded exposure.

Frankly, I think its a bad move for the AAC to renegotiate early. We have every game on national TV for the next 6 years. Due to this exposure, every year we become more well known and more recognized as a national TV level product.

At the end of this contract---we will likely be marketing a better known more recognizable product than we are now. In fact, every year that passes, we become more recognized and more valuable. Truth be told---the only reason ESPN would renegotiate early is because they think it will save them money in the long run. That means we make less over the long haul. I'd preach patience on this front.

Not quite agreeing that the ESPN inventory is going away anytime soon with P5 networks. The theory is it would move games from ESPN 3 not ESPN. For example if the ACC network happens, the game would probably be lost is the Raycom game not the ESPN. Now the AAC might be able to get a Raycom deal for games for tier 3. I think that would be a better move than an AAC network.

There is no AAC Network in the near time future. I will say, if the AAC expanded to a nationwide conference with 4-6 MW teams and added a few major basketball only schools (say UMass, VCU, and Wichita)---then maybe there MIGHT be a viable national conference network. If you are in enough cities and the network is less than 25-50 cents per subscriber---it might be viable option.

Frankly, what I think does make sense is a national G5 network that Is a joint venture by the G5. Give the G5 network a couple of top games from each G5 conference and fill in the rest with 3rd tier stuff. Add in some cheap talking head shows (Saturday "game Day" type show, a conference recap show for each G5 conference, and maybe something like the Tim Brando Show that's G-5 centric on Satallite Radio and has a mirror on the TV network).

Put that together and offer it as a cheap network---maybe .25 a subscriber. With half of college football's fanbases virtually ignored on main stream sports networks, the network could quickly claim a very solid significantly sized niche audience. Think Fox News for the G5. Fox News is now the number one most viewed cable news network in the country because they geared their newscast to an audience that was ignored and often laughed at by the main stream media. Frankly, if I were running NBC-Sports or Fox Sports 2----I'd grab that well educated high earning G5 niche audience before someone else does.

No anything aligning the AAC with the other G4 leagues is a no go in my book. We need to work to separate ourselves from them not the other way around.
To me a deal with ESPN paying 5-6 million per team with similar coverage to what we have should be the goal

(03-08-2015 06:06 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  No anything aligning the AAC with the other G4 leagues is a no go in my book. We need to work to separate ourselves from them not the other way around.
To me a deal with ESPN paying 5-6 million per team with similar coverage to what we have should be the goal

I don't really disagree. The value of a G5 network is it is a national platform with Saturday prime time slots that treats the G5 seriously. I'd prefer we get elevated over the other 4----but at this point, I'm willing to look at any option that helps us survive.

(03-08-2015 06:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 06:06 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  No anything aligning the AAC with the other G4 leagues is a no go in my book. We need to work to separate ourselves from them not the other way around.
To me a deal with ESPN paying 5-6 million per team with similar coverage to what we have should be the goal

I don't really disagree. The value of a G5 network is it is a national platform with Saturday prime time slots that treats the G5 seriously. I'd prefer we get elevated over the fother 4----but at this point, I'm willing to look at any option that helps us survive.

But I don't see what you suggest succeeding nationally. It hasn't for FCS and how much interest is there for most Sun Belt,MAC and CUSA programs?
You never want to tie yourself with those that are viewed below you.

(03-08-2015 09:02 AM)USFRamenu Wrote:  Let UC wait for their Big 12 invite. Kick them and take Ohio...

Yes. Please "kick" us and take little ol' Ohio U. I believe they average somewhere around 15k on a good Saturday, but like you say, you can "spin" them as being a "Statewide" representative.

And then you could, I suppose, pick up Florida A&M and brand them as being more representative of the whole State of Florida than just USF which, as the name implies, only represents the "South" part of the State.

Wow this thread is going downhill fast

(03-08-2015 06:57 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 06:36 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 06:06 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  No anything aligning the AAC with the other G4 leagues is a no go in my book. We need to work to separate ourselves from them not the other way around.
To me a deal with ESPN paying 5-6 million per team with similar coverage to what we have should be the goal

I don't really disagree. The value of a G5 network is it is a national platform with Saturday prime time slots that treats the G5 seriously. I'd prefer we get elevated over the fother 4----but at this point, I'm willing to look at any option that helps us survive.

But I don't see what you suggest succeeding nationally. It hasn't for FCS and how much interest is there for most Sun Belt,MAC and CUSA programs?
You never want to tie yourself with those that are viewed below you.

Where is this jointly owned national FCS network that "hasn't worked". Even if existed, it's not FBS football and as such, I wouldn't expect it carry much of a audience. I could see a G5 network working because it would appeal to so many fanbase covering so much of country that, assuming the network was cheap (say 25 cents a subscriber), the network would likey gain wide spread basic tier adoption. At 80 million subscribers that's 240 million dollars. There are plenty of successful niche networks with smaller audiences than the G5.

So ESPN only has the look in option whil AAC does not, right?

(03-08-2015 07:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 09:02 AM)USFRamenu Wrote:  Let UC wait for their Big 12 invite. Kick them and take Ohio...

Yes. Please "kick" us and take little ol' Ohio U. I believe they average somewhere around 25k every Saturday, but like you say, you can "spin" them as being a "Statewide" representative.

FIFY

(03-08-2015 04:00 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:52 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:37 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:33 AM)TUBballJunkie Wrote:  Agreed.

We've got the SEC, Big 10 and PAC 12 networks. Oklahomans weren't clamoring for them from our cable providers, I tell you that. We just got stuck with them.

I remember just one specific time I've watched any of them, and it's only bc the football game on SEC was also on espn3 bc of that partnership. Otherwise I'm only watching these league contests on main networks.

IMHO the espn exposure is essential for our league.

I called it in my last post and I'm calling it again here.....ESPiN will be looking to strip that exposure clause from any contract we get at the first opportunity they get.

lol... and replace them with what? The SEC network has taken college inventory from the other ESPN networks. An ACC network has the potetnital to do the same. The Big-10 Network will likely be increasing its share of Big-10 inventory to increase its value and the Big-10 is likely moving more of whats left to Fox (have to see how the negotiations go in 2016). So---who else is going to fill those slots?

On the other side of the aisle, the AAC could finally do what it wanted to in 2012. It could maximize its media value by splitting its inventory in to packages that it sells to multiple outlets. One of ESPN, one for NBC, and perhaps a 3rd package for CBS-Sports or Fox-Sports.

Truth is---there is no official "look in". Aresco has said so several times. However, a "look in" can happen anytime ESPN is interested in extending the contract. The MAC commissioner literally hounded ESPN for years before successfully upgrading their contract early. My guess is any renegotiation happens in year 4 or doesn't happen all. Two years prior to expiration is when ESPN extension offer to the old Big East. If they make a 6-8 million per team offer---its a no brainer to take it. If not, we probably wait until the contract expires and go onto the open market----this time with no right of refusal for ESPN.

Perhaps I wrote in a different language. Let me try again. ESPiN will attempt to strip the exposure clause from the current AAC contract, when said contract comes up for it's "look-in". There is no doubt in my mind that happens, successfully or not. If they don't get it stripped at the "look-in", they will attempt to remove it at the time of renewal. Again, there's no doubt in my mind this will happen. Successfully, or not.

Just so you and others are clear.....THIS IS CONCERNING THE AAC CONTRACT!!

To be clear---I am talking about the AAC contract. WThe point I was trying to make is that ESPN has room for all these games now. The problem I am pointing out is that the power conferences are building their own networks that are pulling potential inventory from ESPN, and placing them on these other networks. In other words, the pool of other games to show is shrinking---not expanding. So, there really isn't much else to show if they pull our stuff off the air---thus there isn't much reason to pull our upgraded exposure.

Frankly, I think its a bad move for the AAC to renegotiate early. We have every game on national TV for the next 6 years. Due to this exposure, every year we become more well known and more recognized as a national TV level product.

At the end of this contract---we will likely be marketing a better known more recognizable product than we are now. In fact, every year that passes, we become more recognized and more valuable. Truth be told---the only reason ESPN would renegotiate early is because they think it will save them money in the long run. That means we make less over the long haul. I'd preach patience on this front.

Well it's a question of whether we want to cash in on our early success. It's also a matter of how long the war chest lasts. It's buoying us right now and keeping everyone happy. I believe it won't last until the end of the contract. The instability was an issue the last go round. I think striking early works in our favor in the short term and gives the rest of the leagues time to make moves. This locks us in before we lose further schools. Just my read on it.

(03-08-2015 04:10 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 04:00 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:52 PM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 03:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-08-2015 11:37 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  I called it in my last post and I'm calling it again here.....ESPiN will be looking to strip that exposure clause from any contract we get at the first opportunity they get.

lol... and replace them with what? The SEC network has taken college inventory from the other ESPN networks. An ACC network has the potetnital to do the same. The Big-10 Network will likely be increasing its share of Big-10 inventory to increase its value and the Big-10 is likely moving more of whats left to Fox (have to see how the negotiations go in 2016). So---who else is going to fill those slots?

On the other side of the aisle, the AAC could finally do what it wanted to in 2012. It could maximize its media value by splitting its inventory in to packages that it sells to multiple outlets. One of ESPN, one for NBC, and perhaps a 3rd package for CBS-Sports or Fox-Sports.

Truth is---there is no official "look in". Aresco has said so several times. However, a "look in" can happen anytime ESPN is interested in extending the contract. The MAC commissioner literally hounded ESPN for years before successfully upgrading their contract early. My guess is any renegotiation happens in year 4 or doesn't happen all. Two years prior to expiration is when ESPN extension offer to the old Big East. If they make a 6-8 million per team offer---its a no brainer to take it. If not, we probably wait until the contract expires and go onto the open market----this time with no right of refusal for ESPN.

Perhaps I wrote in a different language. Let me try again. ESPiN will attempt to strip the exposure clause from the current AAC contract, when said contract comes up for it's "look-in". There is no doubt in my mind that happens, successfully or not. If they don't get it stripped at the "look-in", they will attempt to remove it at the time of renewal. Again, there's no doubt in my mind this will happen. Successfully, or not.

Just so you and others are clear.....THIS IS CONCERNING THE AAC CONTRACT!!

To be clear---I am talking about the AAC contract. WThe point I was trying to make is that ESPN has room for all these games now. The problem I am pointing out is that the power conferences are building their own networks that are pulling potential inventory from ESPN, and placing them on these other networks. In other words, the pool of other games to show is shrinking---not expanding. So, there really isn't much else to show if they pull our stuff off the air---thus there isn't much reason to pull our upgraded exposure.

Frankly, I think its a bad move for the AAC to renegotiate early. We have every game on national TV for the next 6 years. Due to this exposure, every year we become more well known and more recognized as a national TV level product.

At the end of this contract---we will likely be marketing a better known more recognizable product than we are now. In fact, every year that passes, we become more recognized and more valuable. Truth be told---the only reason ESPN would renegotiate early is because they think it will save them money in the long run. That means we make less over the long haul. I'd preach patience on this front.

Not quite agreeing that the ESPN inventory is going away anytime soon with P5 networks. The theory is it would move games from ESPN 3 not ESPN. For example if the ACC network happens, the game would probably be lost is the Raycom game not the ESPN. Now the AAC might be able to get a Raycom deal for games for tier 3. I think that would be a better move than an AAC network.

They still need the ad revenue and the only way to maximize that right now is via live programming. Everything will be going ala cart and online so they need all of their channels to have content to earn cash.

(03-08-2015 10:54 PM)AGuyIn_Water Wrote:  So ESPN only has the look in option whil AAC does not, right?

Aresco has stated on several occasions that there is no official "look in". That said, ESPN can talk to us about extending the contract anytime they want. Its just a contract---as long as BOTH parties are agreeable, it can be adjusted, extended, or even terminated. Like I said, Aresco can keep talking to them about an extension which pays more. That's what MAC commissioner Jon Steinbrecher did. He hounded them for 2 years before ESPN sat down with him and did a renegotiation. They said he was on the ESPN campus so often it seemed like he worked there.

(03-08-2015 10:54 PM)AGuyIn_Water Wrote:  So ESPN only has the look in option whil AAC does not, right?

There is no look-in option in the AAC contract. Aresco has said this multiple times. ESPN can re-visit the contract whenever it wants, but there is no official look-in period anywhere in the current contract, which has 5 years to run.

At this point... I don't want to even consider renegotiating our TV deal, or start talking TV networks.

I want - at least - a couple years to let our upcoming AAC-level recruiting classes take hold for our newer programs, and THEN start talking.

We have a short term TV deal. Let's just focus on maturing as a conference. We have a great foundation laid from the first year and change. We have championships. Let's continue that.

The length of our TV deal was a blessing.

(03-09-2015 06:34 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  At this point... I don't want to even consider renegotiating our TV deal, or start talking TV networks.

Well, it all depends. If ESPN called us up tomorrow and said they wanted to raise us to $10m a year starting next year, it wouldn't hurt to at least talk with them about it, lol.

Beyond that, though, i basically agree. Our performance on the football field was so bad this year that we wouldn't want to negotiate with that fresh in people's minds.

(03-08-2015 11:37 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  Well it's a question of whether we want to cash in on our early success. It's also a matter of how long the war chest lasts. It's buoying us right now and keeping everyone happy. I believe it won't last until the end of the contract.

If by "early success" you mean this year's TV ratings for AAC football and basketball games, well, I can't comment on that because I don't know those numbers. Do you?

If you mean performance on the court and field, well, our first year as the AAC under the new CFP system was terrible in football and so far underwhelming in basketball, though we still do have March Madness to pull the basketball chestnuts out of the fire.

Also, based on fan sentiment, I don't really know of any school that is "happy" being in the AAC. We're all searching for the golden ticket to a P5 conference. It would pain me to think that USF admins were being lulled by the momentary monetary cushion provided by our Big East legacy windfall to not do as much as they could be doing to position us for a P5 bid. That's the only real hope any of us have for competing in the football big time, because this past year made it painfully clear that to the national media, P5 football is the only football that matters.