Credit for mturn017 this posted the article on the CUSA board.

http://pilotonline.com/sports/college/co...8703c.html

Further down the article mention expansion. No schools were talked about but it was talked if expanding would save money or even increase revenue.

So I'm guessing that they had some TV numbers to work into the high level expansion talk and if there would be travels savings by going into 2 8 team divisions.

(01-29-2016 11:19 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Credit for mturn017 this posted the article on the CUSA board.

http://pilotonline.com/sports/college/co...8703c.html

Further down the article mention expansion. No schools were talked about but it was talked if expanding would save money or even increase revenue.

So I'm guessing that they had some TV numbers to work into the high level expansion talk and if there would be travels savings by going into 2 8 team divisions.

I just don't see the benefit of going to 16 for CUSA. Two 8 team divisions would reduce travel but would basically be two separate conferences and most likely would end in a bad break up. I think CUSA's best hope is for the Big 12 to take 2 and have that trickle down to CUSA to allow them to go from 14 to 12.

They could offer UMass and NMSU spots.

They'll probably say yes.

(01-29-2016 11:47 AM)Georgia_Power_Company Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:19 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Credit for mturn017 this posted the article on the CUSA board.

http://pilotonline.com/sports/college/co...8703c.html

Further down the article mention expansion. No schools were talked about but it was talked if expanding would save money or even increase revenue.

So I'm guessing that they had some TV numbers to work into the high level expansion talk and if there would be travels savings by going into 2 8 team divisions.

I just don't see the benefit of going to 16 for CUSA. Two 8 team divisions would reduce travel but would basically be two separate conferences and most likely would end in a bad break up. I think CUSA's best hope is for the Big 12 to take 2 and have that trickle down to CUSA to allow them to go from 14 to 12.

Splitting into 2 conferences might be preferable with CCG deregulation. Provided that both conferences could maintain access to the CFB NY6 bowls and a revenue split of CFB Playoff money could be arranged, the 2 8-team conferences would have greater scheduling flexibility.

(01-29-2016 11:19 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Credit for mturn017 this posted the article on the CUSA board.

http://pilotonline.com/sports/college/co...8703c.html

Further down the article mention expansion. No schools were talked about but it was talked if expanding would save money or even increase revenue.

So I'm guessing that they had some TV numbers to work into the high level expansion talk and if there would be travels savings by going into 2 8 team divisions.

I think with the contract being chopped in half, much of the argument for a half-continent conference is eliminated. I could see them going to 18. Basically, they would do nothing but play an 8 game in division round robin schedule and have a championship game with the other division in football. They would play division home-and-homes in basketball with a handful of crossover games and a championship tournament. Non-revenue sports would just play in division. Essentially, they would be two conferences that share championships, negotiate TV/bowl agreements together, and share conference operational expenses. Its the least disruptive way to cut expenses (like a split) during the remaining years of the current CFP without any of the disadvantages of actually splitting (no CFP money, no NCAA auto bids). Or--you could do the same thing by adding just 2 teams and going to a 7 game conference football schedule (that might be better because you split the CFP/media pie less ways and accomplish the same goal--design the most cost efficient league possible). The only down side to just adding 2 and going to 7 games is that home-away scheduling is not equal in any given year. Some teams will have 1 more home conference game than others.

Once the current CFP is about to expire, the 2 sides could split if they wished and would still be able to be part of the next CFP agreement and could immediately qualify for automatic NCAA bids as both divisions will be comprised of more than 6 teams that have played Olympic sports together for more than 8 consecutive years.

(01-29-2016 12:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:19 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Credit for mturn017 this posted the article on the CUSA board.

http://pilotonline.com/sports/college/co...8703c.html

Further down the article mention expansion. No schools were talked about but it was talked if expanding would save money or even increase revenue.

So I'm guessing that they had some TV numbers to work into the high level expansion talk and if there would be travels savings by going into 2 8 team divisions.

I think with the contract being chopped in half, much of the argument for a half-continent conference is eliminated. I could see them going to 18. Basically, they would do nothing but play an 8 game in division round robin schedule and have a championship game with the other division in football. They would play division home-and-homes in basketball with a handful of crossover games and a championship tournament. Non-revenue sports would just play in division. Essentially, they would be two conferences that share championships, negotiate TV/bowl agreements together, and share conference operational expenses. Its the least disruptive way to cut expenses (like a split) during the remaining years of the current CFP without any of the disadvantages of actually splitting (no CFP money, no NCAA auto bids). Or--you could do the same thing by adding just 2 teams and going to a 7 game conference football schedule (that might be better because you split the CFP/media pie less ways and accomplish the same goal--design the most cost efficient league possible).

Once the current CFP is about to expire, the 2 sides could split if they wished and would still be able to be part of the next CFP agreement and could immediately qualify for automatic NCAA bids as both divisions will be comprised of more than 6 teams that have played Olympic sports together for more than 8 consecutive years.

Who is CUSA going to be able to get by going to 18?

More FCS upgrades? Wichita State and Missouri State?

I liked this quote from the article but I'm skeptical until I see the results in print.

“I think we’re going to be in a really good place with the quality of our broadcasts, the distribution of our broadcasts and the compensation we will receive as a league."

(01-29-2016 12:15 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 12:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:19 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Credit for mturn017 this posted the article on the CUSA board.

http://pilotonline.com/sports/college/co...8703c.html

Further down the article mention expansion. No schools were talked about but it was talked if expanding would save money or even increase revenue.

So I'm guessing that they had some TV numbers to work into the high level expansion talk and if there would be travels savings by going into 2 8 team divisions.

I think with the contract being chopped in half, much of the argument for a half-continent conference is eliminated. I could see them going to 18. Basically, they would do nothing but play an 8 game in division round robin schedule and have a championship game with the other division in football. They would play division home-and-homes in basketball with a handful of crossover games and a championship tournament. Non-revenue sports would just play in division. Essentially, they would be two conferences that share championships, negotiate TV/bowl agreements together, and share conference operational expenses. Its the least disruptive way to cut expenses (like a split) during the remaining years of the current CFP without any of the disadvantages of actually splitting (no CFP money, no NCAA auto bids). Or--you could do the same thing by adding just 2 teams and going to a 7 game conference football schedule (that might be better because you split the CFP/media pie less ways and accomplish the same goal--design the most cost efficient league possible).

Once the current CFP is about to expire, the 2 sides could split if they wished and would still be able to be part of the next CFP agreement and could immediately qualify for automatic NCAA bids as both divisions will be comprised of more than 6 teams that have played Olympic sports together for more than 8 consecutive years.

Who is CUSA going to be able to get by going to 18?

More FCS upgrades? Wichita State and Missouri State?

Any of Texas St, ASU, Arky St, and U-LL would certainly have to look at idea if they were brought in with this efficient plan in mind. Georgia St, Georgia Southern, and Appy St would be interested in the east under the same conditions.

If the idea was to become extremely cost efficient, then CUSA would still offer an significant upgrade over the Sunbelt (especially if CUSA reduced entry fees). It wouldn't be JUST a $400K increase in media earnings, it would be that slightly higher media income PLUS--- larger bowl pool, more nearby familiar opponents, and vastly reduced expenses.

(01-29-2016 12:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 11:19 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Credit for mturn017 this posted the article on the CUSA board.

http://pilotonline.com/sports/college/co...8703c.html

Further down the article mention expansion. No schools were talked about but it was talked if expanding would save money or even increase revenue.

So I'm guessing that they had some TV numbers to work into the high level expansion talk and if there would be travels savings by going into 2 8 team divisions.

I think with the contract being chopped in half, much of the argument for a half-continent conference is eliminated. I could see them going to 18. Basically, they would do nothing but play an 8 game in division round robin schedule and have a championship game with the other division in football. They would play division home-and-homes in basketball with a handful of crossover games and a championship tournament. Non-revenue sports would just play in division. Essentially, they would be two conferences that share championships, negotiate TV/bowl agreements together, and share conference operational expenses. Its the least disruptive way to cut expenses (like a split) during the remaining years of the current CFP without any of the disadvantages of actually splitting (no CFP money, no NCAA auto bids). Or--you could do the same thing by adding just 2 teams and going to a 7 game conference football schedule (that might be better because you split the CFP/media pie less ways and accomplish the same goal--design the most cost efficient league possible). The only down side to just adding 2 and going to 7 games is that home-away scheduling is not equal in any given year. Some teams will have 1 more home conference game than others.

Once the current CFP is about to expire, the 2 sides could split if they wished and would still be able to be part of the next CFP agreement and could immediately qualify for automatic NCAA bids as both divisions will be comprised of more than 6 teams that have played Olympic sports together for more than 8 consecutive years.

This makes a lot of sense. End up with an Eastern and a Western C-USA

(01-29-2016 12:16 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I liked this quote from the article but I'm skeptical until I see the results in print.

“I think we’re going to be in a really good place with the quality of our broadcasts, the distribution of our broadcasts and the compensation we will receive as a league."

I think the compensation part of that was one of those he was just trying to be positive. However, I would not be a bit surprised to find that there is more exposure for the league--thus, the loss in compensation is made up for in increased exposure.

I said this over on the CUSA site---I have a feeling they are going to do something similar to the deal the MAC did with ESPN. All CUSA schools will agree to upgrade production capabilities to certain specs and ASN will provide a top notch streaming platform (similar to ESPN-3) to warehouse and stream the content. That would be a huge step forward for CUSA (especially for the exposure for basketball and the non-revenue sports).

Why split less money more ways?

(01-29-2016 12:28 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Why split less money more ways?

The discussion apparently was, will expansion both bring in additional money and save money on travel. Just a general discussion within the conference at this point.

(01-29-2016 12:28 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Why split less money more ways?

Admittedly I didn't read the article but I'm assuming any adds would be net neutral. So strategically adding schools that work geographically would result in more money due to decreased travel costs. Addition by subtraction naaah mean?

(01-29-2016 12:16 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I liked this quote from the article but I'm skeptical until I see the results in print.

“I think we’re going to be in a really good place with the quality of our broadcasts, the distribution of our broadcasts and the compensation we will receive as a league."

Especially since Selig is quoted as saying that he expects the $14 million dollar media deal to be significantly reduced this time around.

He also said the league discussed whether expansion might reduce costs, especially travel costs. He didn't say what conclusion they reached on that point.

At the levels of revenue in the G5 conferences, especially the MAC, CUSA and SBC, any changes are likely to have only an insignificant effect on their members' financial competitiveness. They should associate with whatever schools they want to associate with for reasons that transcend financial consideration.

(01-29-2016 12:31 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 12:16 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I liked this quote from the article but I'm skeptical until I see the results in print.

“I think we’re going to be in a really good place with the quality of our broadcasts, the distribution of our broadcasts and the compensation we will receive as a league."

Especially since Selig is quoted as saying that he expects the $14 million dollar media deal to be significantly reduced this time around.

He also said the league discussed whether expansion might reduce costs, especially travel costs. He didn't say what conclusion they reached on that point.

At the levels of revenue in the G5 conferences, especially the MAC, CUSA and SBC, any changes are likely to have only an insignificant effect on their members' financial competitiveness. They should associate with whatever schools they want to associate with for reasons that transcend financial consideration.

Selig was never quoted on the expectation of reduced revenue. That was in a previous article by the same writer referencing an anonymous source and he repeated that in this article. That source could have been Selig but he was never named as the source which makes me wonder why he would state in this article that the conference is in a good place regarding compensation.

(01-29-2016 12:16 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  I liked this quote from the article but I'm skeptical until I see the results in print.

“I think we’re going to be in a really good place with the quality of our broadcasts, the distribution of our broadcasts and the compensation we will receive as a league."

If you can watch high-quality, HD telecasts of your games, with decent, likable play by play & color commentators and decent graphics, and have then available to any home in the country via a sports tier or internet subscription ... not much more you can ask for, as a G5 league.

(01-29-2016 12:28 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Why split less money more ways?

Because at about $500K per team, the drop in revenue from splitting media income more ways is likely much less than the decrease in travel expenses that would occur if the league added schools and played more "in division" games and fewer "cross divisional" games.

I think ODU indicated their travel expenses increased between 1-2 million due to entering CUSA. That's a much bigger number than $500K. If those travel expenses could be trimmed back down to be more similar to their old conference, that would free up 1-2 extra million for other things (FCOA or other autonomous benefits coming down the pike). It obvious its just an idea they are tossing around at this point, but its not without merit.

(01-29-2016 12:28 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Why split less money more ways?

Exactly. I don't see how expansion really solves this. Expansion might be better for Old Dominion, but it would seem to slice the pie even more thinly.

A simpler solution would involve Marshall rejoining the MAC. That one move would dramatically cut Marshall's travel costs and increase revenue (a bit) for every remaining member of Conference USA. But both Marshall and the MAC would have to want that.

And... that's complicated.

(01-29-2016 12:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 12:28 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Why split less money more ways?

Because at about $500K per team, the drop in revenue from splitting media income more ways is likely much less than the decrease in travel expenses that would occur if the league added schools and played more "in division" games and fewer "cross divisional" games.

I think ODU indicated their travel expenses increased between 1-2 million due to entering CUSA. That's a much bigger number than $500K. If those travel expenses could be trimmed back down to be more similar to their old conference, that would free up 1-2 extra million for other things (FCOA or other autonomous benefits coming down the pike). It obvious its just an idea they are tossing around at this point, but its not without merit.

Probably will think more about down the road when the TV gets finalized. But it shows they are thinking about cost savings and if expansion will be a net gain rather than additional loss. I think it will depend on who. I would guess NMSU and UMass. Where NMSU helps some savings on trip to UTEP and UMass a new market for revenue. That is only if UMass see value to leave the A-10.

(01-29-2016 12:54 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  

(01-29-2016 12:28 PM)VA49er Wrote:  Why split less money more ways?

Exactly. I don't see how expansion really solves this. Expansion might be better for Old Dominion, but it would seem to slice the pie even more thinly.

A simpler solution would involve Marshall rejoining the MAC. That one move would dramatically cut Marshall's travel costs and increase revenue (a bit) for every remaining member of Conference USA. But both Marshall and the MAC would have to want that.

And... that's complicated.

Well if MWC and CUSA are thinking about expanding, maybe there is some talk of consolidation-but G5 to G4, not P5 to P4. Right now there are 60 schools with UAB and CCU joining. Two of 14 and two of 16 covers 60 schools. If Big 12 takes two, they would have room for all 62. Would still leave the independents.