Some people seem to think the reduction in TV dollars will be made up by the Easter bunny.

NCAA credits are the only possible source for a large sum of ongoing income.Basketball is the source.Simple.

(05-04-2016 10:22 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  you are not understand about the part in bold and before I say this let me say I would be saying the same for Western.

Not one of those 3 programs move the needle as fan as viewer. Viewers in large numbers. Now if this was 2011 and S.Miss was playing for a BCS spot in a bowl...

the last couple games on TV would bring in higher numbers. But that's it.

There is a ceiling on viewers in each of those 3 markets and it's why each are in CUSA and not the AAC. At least the major reason. The only hope for a ton more TV dollars are for large market schools to carve out a fanbase in those markets. Look at it this way .5% of viewers in FIU's market is more than 100% in S. Miss (or Western)

Most of our programs are local regional at best. At least the programs winning right now in football. You might rather see that game but the masses don't.

To get each of the three programs you named up to that level it will take a 5 year run of being ranked and ranked highly. I'm not saying that to hurt any of the three programs feeling ..as I said replace any with Western and it would the the same.

That is why CUSA went with markets...it's still the easiest and quickest way to grow TV dollars. Honestly without a bidding war...it's about the only way. That's the facts of it.

"Carve out a fan bases in those markets". You make it sound like it's really easy. Why haven't G5 teams in major markets struggling with winning and attendance figured that out yet? That's along the same vein as "just get better at basketball".

Sure Marshall and Southern Miss got left behind, but so did UTEP and Rice and UAB while the AAC invited East Carolina, who is in a town under 70,000. Tulane is the only AAC member who is a media market and nothing else. Every other recently-invited member has at least some recent success in football or basketball along with substantial fan bases. The AAC put itself on an island between the P5 and the rest of the G5 by inviting strong programs, not media markets.

There is absolutely no reason you can't build a fan base outside a large city. Boise State did it in a very medium-sized town, and so did East Carolina. The idea people in larger cities will come out to watch teams winning 3-5 games every year if you just market enthusiastically enough is just wishful thinking.

You will find as your new TV agreement goes into effect that ESPN doesn't buy into the idea that they need to televise Florida Atlantic versus Charlotte because lots of people will watch in local bars and pubs. Games like WKU versus Marshall and Southern Miss versus La Tech will take priority over games between two of your market teams. ESPN wants teams that will be watched, which is why Georgia Southern, App State, and Arkansas State seem to be their favorite SBC teams to televise despite them all being in small towns.

If anything the "media market" strategy is the reason CUSA is now practically at eye level with the Sun Belt. You had a chance to hand pick who you wanted from the FCS and the Sun Belt, and now the difference in TV money between the two leagues is most likely going to be negligible once the SBC deal is renewed and even though the Sun Belt was last in the G5 conference standings, we profited more per school than CUSA, the MWC, and the MAC even with two lame-duck football members who were dragging the conference football rating downward.

(05-04-2016 01:11 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Some people seem to think the reduction in TV dollars will be made up by the Easter bunny.

NCAA credits are the only possible source for a large sum of ongoing income.Basketball is the source.Simple.

I got sidetracked on support in the thread you started but you are correct...

probably the only way to increase dollars , in large amounts, is to improve basketball as a conference. I believe if we improved enough it also makes us more valuable to TV. Maybe not game charger valuable. But enough to over come most of the TV dollars we are losing.

Either way we are looking at a 3 to 5 year window of major improvement needed

(05-04-2016 01:16 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  If anything the "media market" strategy is the reason CUSA is now practically at eye level with the Sun Belt.

Thanks for the laugh little guy

(05-04-2016 01:11 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Some people seem to think the reduction in TV dollars will be made up by the Easter bunny.

NCAA credits are the only possible source for a large sum of ongoing income.Basketball is the source.Simple.

Got to chuck the deadweight. No one knows if TV revenue will continue to decrease. This is what CUSA 3.0 is worth as currently constructed.

There is zero reason to have 14 teams in this conference.

(05-04-2016 01:16 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 10:22 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  you are not understand about the part in bold and before I say this let me say I would be saying the same for Western.

Not one of those 3 programs move the needle as fan as viewer. Viewers in large numbers. Now if this was 2011 and S.Miss was playing for a BCS spot in a bowl...

the last couple games on TV would bring in higher numbers. But that's it.

There is a ceiling on viewers in each of those 3 markets and it's why each are in CUSA and not the AAC. At least the major reason. The only hope for a ton more TV dollars are for large market schools to carve out a fanbase in those markets. Look at it this way .5% of viewers in FIU's market is more than 100% in S. Miss (or Western)

Most of our programs are local regional at best. At least the programs winning right now in football. You might rather see that game but the masses don't.

To get each of the three programs you named up to that level it will take a 5 year run of being ranked and ranked highly. I'm not saying that to hurt any of the three programs feeling ..as I said replace any with Western and it would the the same.

That is why CUSA went with markets...it's still the easiest and quickest way to grow TV dollars. Honestly without a bidding war...it's about the only way. That's the facts of it.

"Carve out a fan bases in those markets". You make it sound like it's really easy. Why haven't G5 teams in major markets struggling with winning and attendance figured that out yet? That's along the same vein as "just get better at basketball".

Sure Marshall and Southern Miss got left behind, but so did UTEP and Rice and UAB while the AAC invited East Carolina, who is in a town under 70,000. Tulane is the only AAC member who is a media market and nothing else. Every other recently-invited member has at least some recent success in football and basketball along with substantial fan bases. The AAC put itself on an island between the P5 and the rest of the G5 by inviting strong programs, not media markets.

There is absolutely no reason you can't build a fan base outside a large city. Boise State did it in a very medium-sized town, and so did East Carolina. The idea people in larger cities will come out to watch teams winning 3-5 games every year if you just market enthusiastically enough is just wishful thinking.

You will find as your new TV agreement goes into effect that ESPN doesn't buy into the idea that they need to televise Florida Atlantic versus Charlotte because lots of people will watch in local bars and pubs. Games like WKU versus Marshall and Southern Miss versus La Tech will take priority over games between two of your market teams. ESPN wants teams that will be watched, which is why Georgia Southern, App State, and Arkansas State seem to be their favorite SBC teams to televise despite them all being in small towns.

If anything the "media market" strategy is the reason CUSA is now practically at eye level with the Sun Belt. You had a chance to hand pick who you wanted from the FCS and the Sun Belt, and now the difference in TV money between the two leagues is most likely going to be negligible once the SBC deal is renewed and even though the Sun Belt was last in the G5 conference standings, we profited more per school than CUSA, the MWC, and the MAC even with two lame-duck football members who were dragging the conference football rating downward.

Well lets see ...

UCF and USF both build decent fanbases in areas that they had little support. So no it's not easy and I never said it was but ..for TV dollars to grow so does the number of eyes.

As I said FIU could get .5% of the eyes in their market and have more than S. Miss, Western, Marshall, Tech with 100%

FIU gave the conference the best chance to bring in the number of eyes needed. So far FIU has failed to do that and they might not ever do it. But as far as TV numbers go...CUSA had to take that chance.

I'm just going to address one other thing...

Boise State does not sitting in the middle of SEC and ACC schools. Boise State filled a void just as Gonzaga did in basketball. They earned it, on the field but if they were sitting right in the middle of the SEC . Boise State would not have became the media darlings they are.

As a example S. Ill was winning in the NCAA tourney at the same or higher rate as Gonzaga and also during the season. S.Ill went to the NCAA tourney 6 years in a roll and with 2 sweet 16 runs and 3 top 20 years (#11,#19,#15)

There were too many Big 10, SEC and even CUSA big boys sitting around them to get the attention espn gave the zags.

S. Ill had no void to fill

There is no void of good teams or national media teams in any of our areas. It will take a run like no one in this conference has seen to become that media darling and get the espn support that those two WESTERN schools got.

HUGE DIFFERENCE

(05-04-2016 01:33 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  Well lets see ...

UCF and USF both build decent fanbases in areas that they had little support. So no it's not easy and I never said it was but ..for TV dollars to grow so does the number of eyes.

As I said FIU could get .5% of the eyes in their market and have more than S. Miss, Western, Marshall, Tech with 100%

FIU gave the conference the best chance to bring in the number of eyes needed. So far FIU has failed to do that and they might not ever do it. But as far as TV numbers go...CUSA had to take that chance.

Of course UCF and USF made nice fan bases. that doesn't mean any FBS newbie can automatically replicate that or that someone not in a major market can't. Any FBS newbie in a major market could just as easily be more like North Texas, Buffalo, UTEP, San Jose State, or UAB than they are UCF and USF.

(05-04-2016 01:33 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  I'm just going to address one other thing...

Boise State does not sitting in the middle of SEC and ACC schools. Boise State filled a void just as Gonzaga did in basketball. They earned it, on the field but if they were sitting right in the middle of the SEC . Boise State would not have became the media darlings they are.

As a example S. Ill was winning in the NCAA tourney at the same or higher rate as Gonzaga and also during the season. S.Ill went to the NCAA tourney 6 years in a roll and with 2 sweet 16 runs and 3 top 20 years (#11,#19,#15)

There were too many Big 10, SEC and even CUSA big boys sitting around them to get the attention espn gave the zags.

S. Ill had no void to fill

There is no void of good teams or national media teams in any of our areas. It will take a run like no one in this conference has seen to become that media darling and get the espn support that those two WESTERN schools got.

HUGE DIFFERENCE

Not having any P5 teams around must really come in handy scooping up the treasure trove of football talent in Big Sky country.

Sarcasm aside, if you look at where Boise gets a lot of their players come from, they do recruiting in California, Texas, SEC country, and even some in Europe. In other words, they go into the back yards of states where lots of other schools recruit. It's expensive and difficult. They probably travel more in recruiting than any CUSA team.

By the same token, most of CUSA's major market teams are in places with a dense arrangement of schools, so there's that to consider.

(05-04-2016 01:31 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 01:11 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Some people seem to think the reduction in TV dollars will be made up by the Easter bunny.

NCAA credits are the only possible source for a large sum of ongoing income.Basketball is the source.Simple.

Got to chuck the deadweight. No one knows if TV revenue will continue to decrease. This is what CUSA 3.0 is worth as currently constructed.

There is zero reason to have 14 teams in this conference.

A couple of problems with that. If you get rid of 2 or 4 schools, how will that affect the media deals? Might get rid of schools the partners want to have on the contract. How do you go about excommunicating 2 or 4 members? We all signed the by-laws and I believe a school has to practically commit murder to be thrown out. Given some time it will likely sort itself out.

The million dollar question is whether this will lead to a reorganization of the SBC and CUSA where like minded football schools with strong support and attendance unite.

(05-04-2016 01:11 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Some people seem to think the reduction in TV dollars will be made up by the Easter bunny.

NCAA credits are the only possible source for a large sum of ongoing income.Basketball is the source.Simple.

TV revenue even at the P5 level is small compare to gate revenue. For any G5 school to increase its value, it has to have sell-outs week in and week out. For G5 schools gate receipts in football and basketball probably are around 80 to 85% of the revenue for an athletic dept.

(05-04-2016 01:21 PM)wh49er Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 01:16 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  If anything the "media market" strategy is the reason CUSA is now practically at eye level with the Sun Belt.

Thanks for the laugh little guy

The thing that puzzles me about the GaSou posters is this: if it is so great being with all the small town schools in the sunbelt, why do they come here so pissed off at CUSA membership decisions?

(05-04-2016 02:11 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 01:31 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 01:11 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Some people seem to think the reduction in TV dollars will be made up by the Easter bunny.

NCAA credits are the only possible source for a large sum of ongoing income.Basketball is the source.Simple.

Got to chuck the deadweight. No one knows if TV revenue will continue to decrease. This is what CUSA 3.0 is worth as currently constructed.

There is zero reason to have 14 teams in this conference.

A couple of problems with that. If you get rid of 2 or 4 schools, how will that affect the media deals? Might get rid of schools the partners want to have on the contract. How do you go about excommunicating 2 or 4 members? We all signed the by-laws and I believe a school has to practically commit murder to be thrown out. Given some time it will likely sort itself out.

I don't know the bylaws. I can't speak to that.

As far as the media deal is concerned, CUSA knows what value every team brings. That doesn't mean you simply kick out the lowest TV revenue schools. There needs to be a overall approach focused on decreasing costs and maximizing performance and revenues.

To continue to split the pie 14 ways doesn't make any sense with escalating costs. The CPF distribution is based on 12 teams (or maybe 10 now). The championship game no longer requires 12 teams. Clearly, 14 teams isn't bringing more value to the TV contract. And the additional teams wouldn't seem to help travel very much (since the conference stretches across 3/4 of the continent). It is time to face the hard fact that CUSA didn't adequately anticipate the changes in college athletics. The conference as currently constructed is based on an outdated model. Unfortunately, the dynamic college athletic environment is rapidly evolving and CUSA is not in a position to wait for it's teams to self-sort.

(05-04-2016 01:10 PM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 12:20 PM)WKUYG
Couch fans don't support their program. Internet stream fans don't support their program. They are fans...[/b' Wrote:  not supporters

This is true...

No, this bs is NOT TRUE! ASN DOES NOT REGULARLY BROADCAST C-USA games in Dallas-Fort Worth or Houston, TX. These are two of the Top 10 largest tv markets in the US.

If C-USA fans in these cities cannot see their teams on ASN then they are FORCED to watch an internet stream instead. I am fully willing to PAY DEARLY for this stream due to C-USA's ineptness when it comes to negotiating television rights. Until this amateur ASN crap is fixed internet streaming is needed.

Sincerely,
Top 10% donor to my university

(05-04-2016 01:16 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  "Carve out a fan bases in those markets". You make it sound like it's really easy. Why haven't G5 teams in major markets struggling with winning and attendance figured that out yet? That's along the same vein as "just get better at basketball".

You answered the question you asked, "struggling with winning". FIU has over 200k alums, most still living in Florida. Are you suggesting a FIU program with 3 consecutive 10+ win seasons will NEVER have better attendance that Georgia Southern? With home schedules like this year's with 2 B1G teams, 1 local AAC team?

Our solution IS real easy, the fans want to see a winning product on the field. The same expectations as a small town school, I don't know why you think the expectations should be different on that. The thing that you fear is what happens a team with 200k alums in driving distance starts to win.

UTSA showed what is possible for them if they become a consistent in the win column. The same thing holds true for ODU, UNCC etc.

While Georgia Southern, 5 national championships later cannot max out their 18k stadium.

(05-04-2016 02:50 PM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 01:16 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  "Carve out a fan bases in those markets". You make it sound like it's really easy. Why haven't G5 teams in major markets struggling with winning and attendance figured that out yet? That's along the same vein as "just get better at basketball".

You answered the question you asked, "struggling with winning". FIU has over 200k alums, most still living in Florida. Are you suggesting a FIU program with 3 consecutive 10+ win seasons will NEVER have better attendance that Georgia Southern? With home schedules like this year's with 2 B1G teams, 1 local AAC team?

Our solution IS real easy, the fans want to see a winning product on the field. The same expectations as a small town school, I don't know why you think the expectations should be different on that. The thing that you fear is what happens a team with 200k alums in driving distance starts to win.

UTSA showed what is possible for them if they become a consistent in the win column. The same thing holds true for ODU, UNCC etc.

While Georgia Southern, 5 national championships later cannot max out their 18k stadium.

What some fans can never understand....

The SBC, MAC, or CUSA conference is not going to get the sleeping giant after it wakes up. At least not today. You take a chance it will one day wake up and become something TV wants to pay for. Getting a small slice of the Miami/Boca/Ft Lauderdale market is valuable. Hopefully one day both Fla schools in CUSA can get that.

I look at it this way some teams in this conference had 50+ years to get their slice of the market. Each of those schools went through periods of losing years. Everyone of them a lot longer than either Fla school. If we are still waiting 35 years from now then those fans can *****.

(05-04-2016 02:37 PM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  The thing that puzzles me about the GaSou posters is this: if it is so great being with all the small town schools in the sunbelt, why do they come here so pissed off at CUSA membership decisions?

(05-04-2016 02:50 PM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  You answered the question you asked, "struggling with winning". FIU has over 200k alums, most still living in Florida. Are you suggesting a FIU program with 3 consecutive 10+ win seasons will NEVER have better attendance that Georgia Southern? With home schedules like this year's with 2 B1G teams, 1 local AAC team?

Our solution IS real easy, the fans want to see a winning product on the field. The same expectations as a small town school, I don't know why you think the expectations should be different on that. The thing that you fear is what happens a team with 200k alums in driving distance starts to win.

UTSA showed what is possible for them if they become a consistent in the win column. The same thing holds true for ODU, UNCC etc.

While Georgia Southern, 5 national championships later cannot max out their 18k stadium.

In 2011, your best season in football ever, you averaged 18,400. We averaged 20k across two seasons with 3 weekday home games and no P5 home opponents.

Honestly, I'm not mad. Why would I be mad that we have peers in the Sun Belt with a good history of football success that got overlooked by CUSA because they are in small towns?

All I'm really saying is, you guys here that think media markets will be the salvation of any one program or the conference might want to temper your expectations some. And it's not just me and other Sun Belt interlopers saying that, it's also some people over on this side.

(05-04-2016 02:43 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 02:11 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 01:31 PM)monarchoptimist Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 01:11 PM)TOPSTRAIGHT Wrote:  Some people seem to think the reduction in TV dollars will be made up by the Easter bunny.

NCAA credits are the only possible source for a large sum of ongoing income.Basketball is the source.Simple.

Got to chuck the deadweight. No one knows if TV revenue will continue to decrease. This is what CUSA 3.0 is worth as currently constructed.

There is zero reason to have 14 teams in this conference.

A couple of problems with that. If you get rid of 2 or 4 schools, how will that affect the media deals? Might get rid of schools the partners want to have on the contract. How do you go about excommunicating 2 or 4 members? We all signed the by-laws and I believe a school has to practically commit murder to be thrown out. Given some time it will likely sort itself out.

I don't know the bylaws. I can't speak to that.

As far as the media deal is concerned, CUSA knows what value every team brings. That doesn't mean you simply kick out the lowest TV revenue schools. There needs to be a overall approach focused on decreasing costs and maximizing performance and revenues.

To continue to split the pie 14 ways doesn't make any sense with escalating costs. The CPF distribution is based on 12 teams (or maybe 10 now). The championship game no longer requires 12 teams. Clearly, 14 teams isn't bringing more value to the TV contract. And the additional teams wouldn't seem to help travel very much (since the conference stretches across 3/4 of the continent). It is time to face the hard fact that CUSA didn't adequately anticipate the changes in college athletics. The conference as currently constructed is based on an outdated model. Unfortunately, the dynamic college athletic environment is rapidly evolving and CUSA is not in a position to wait for it's teams to self-sort.

Pull out of Texas entirely and move conference HQ to Nashville. Gets you down to 10. Can't see longstanding members Rice and UTEP kicked to the curb, so that scenario would have to include them to MWC.

There isn't enough information to suggestion which schools need to go but there is plenty to know the model CUSA currently employs is ineffective and is in need of overhaul.

(05-04-2016 03:28 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 02:37 PM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  The thing that puzzles me about the GaSou posters is this: if it is so great being with all the small town schools in the sunbelt, why do they come here so pissed off at CUSA membership decisions?

(05-04-2016 02:50 PM)FIU4Ever Wrote:  You answered the question you asked, "struggling with winning". FIU has over 200k alums, most still living in Florida. Are you suggesting a FIU program with 3 consecutive 10+ win seasons will NEVER have better attendance that Georgia Southern? With home schedules like this year's with 2 B1G teams, 1 local AAC team?

Our solution IS real easy, the fans want to see a winning product on the field. The same expectations as a small town school, I don't know why you think the expectations should be different on that. The thing that you fear is what happens a team with 200k alums in driving distance starts to win.

UTSA showed what is possible for them if they become a consistent in the win column. The same thing holds true for ODU, UNCC etc.

While Georgia Southern, 5 national championships later cannot max out their 18k stadium.

In 2011, your best season in football ever, you averaged 18,400. We averaged 20k across two seasons with 3 weekday home games and no P5 home opponents.

Honestly, I'm not mad. Why would I be mad that we have peers in the Sun Belt with a good history of football success that got overlooked by CUSA because they are in small towns?

All I'm really saying is, you guys here that think media markets will be the salvation of any one program or the conference might want to temper your expectations some. And it's not just me and other Sun Belt interlopers saying that, it's also some people over on this side.

So FIU did 18.4k with ZERO national championships and a decade of football. Georgia Southern finally got up to 20k after 5 championships and 92 years of football. Congratulations!!!

Why would I be mad that we have peers in the Sun Belt with a good history of football success that got overlooked by CUSA because they are in small towns? This statement says: "You mad"

There is value in a conference that goes beyond TV dollars...rights / licensing

Take away the money each of us loses on TV and it's still way more than the SBC. I did not chart it but heres a few MAC schools

Northern Illinois $3,965,989
Bowling Green $3,045,882
Toledo $4,340,422
Ohio $3,995,205