The news just keeps getting better and better...

http://www.wvgazettemail.com/sports/2016...sa-tv-deal

How is this better?

(05-28-2016 12:46 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  How is this better?

It's not.

(05-28-2016 12:46 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  How is this better?

Less money for them is good for us.

(05-28-2016 02:25 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 12:46 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  How is this better?

Less money for them is good for us.

Thought that was obvious. Guess some didn't get it.

It's a bit of a double edged sword. While their complete drop off bodes well for the Sun Belt for the foreseeable future, you have to wonder what our deal will look like when we finally renegotiate. Will ours stay fairly consistent? Will the low ball us and use CUSA's deal as their reasoning? Will we get bumped up a bit with better attendance in unique settings/non-markets?

While it's always nice to see CUSA get knocked down a peg, I do wonder what will happen with our deal and how King Karl will handle it.

(05-28-2016 02:11 PM)trapdrawApp Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 12:46 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  How is this better?

It's not.

No matter what those CUSA people say this is a CUSA problem and not a G5 problem.

Oh yeah, marketz!

(05-28-2016 02:46 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 02:25 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 12:46 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  How is this better?

Less money for them is good for us.

Thought that was obvious. Guess some didn't get it.

Too me it's the opposite of " a rising tide raises all ships". Short term this is a good thing but I believe it's a sign of what might lie ahead for us. Hope I'm wrong.

(05-28-2016 04:21 PM)trapdrawApp Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 02:46 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 02:25 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 12:46 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  How is this better?

Less money for them is good for us.

Thought that was obvious. Guess some didn't get it.

Too me it's the opposite of " a rising tide raises all ships". Short term this is a good thing but I believe it's a sign of what might lie ahead for us. Hope I'm wrong.

We can't go any lower than we are...

Quote:For the first time since Marshall joined C-USA in 2005, the TV contract will be less valuable than that of the school’s former league, the MAC. In the previous 11 years, C-USA’s deal was so much more lucrative, the improvement from the MAC deal dwarfed MU’s added travel expenses.

Now, MAC schools appear to enjoy more than a 2-to-1 advantage in TV revenue.

The MAC’s 13-year extension with ESPN for exclusive rights, signed in August 2014, is worth a reported $100 million, or about $670,000 per year per school. Before that, MAC schools were realizing roughly $120,000.

One asterisk on the MAC deal that is also expected to apply to C-USA: Schools will have to produce their own telecasts of non-football events to stream on ESPN3.

And this is also where the SBC has an advantage. Each division is fairly compact and each travel partner works well within the footprint. CUSA does not have logical travel partners.

So their travel costs are up compared to the SBC and MAC.

Their media deal is considerably less than the MAC and slightly above the SBC.

They'll have to pay some production costs, further diluting the revenue stream.

They have the lowest per team CFP payout, despite not finishing last.

This is what many of us have been saying for years. The re is no longer any reason to switch leagues. At this point, the only move that makes sense would be to the AAC or MWC.

What the SBC needs to focus on now is scheduling for its major sports. Karl Benson gets blasted, but his ideas on football scheduling are right on. I think the same principle should apply in MBB. Schedule more G5 games instead of money games, get some wins, the RPI improves, the NCAA seeding is better and the likelihood of more units from the tourney payout shoot up. In baseball, there needs to be a similar focus, winning non-conference games. When half the RPI formula is opponent's winning percentage, it doesn't matter who the opponents are. Just win the games.

CUSA knuckleheads have received their reality check. Sun Belt, MAC, and CUSA are all in the same boat for all practical purposes. So what if CUSA makes 2.5x Sun Belt per school in TV money?

ark30inf has put it into perspective perfectly - a few hundred thousand dollars more from ESPN/TV per school isn't going to make or break a 15 to 30 million dollar budget. 300K is 1% of 30 Million. BFD.

Now lets just continue to build our Sun Belt programs and fan bases and it starts with A-State beating Toledo and Utah State this year!

(05-28-2016 04:21 PM)trapdrawApp Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 02:46 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 02:25 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-28-2016 12:46 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  How is this better?

Less money for them is good for us.

Thought that was obvious. Guess some didn't get it.

Too me it's the opposite of " a rising tide raises all ships". Short term this is a good thing but I believe it's a sign of what might lie ahead for us. Hope I'm wrong.

IMO this was basically a market correction. I have a hard time believing their AD's and CEO's didn't see it coming. Especially in light of the revelation the networks cut revenues the last two years and CUSA made up the difference from exit fees. TV execs have simply adjusted for the new membership. They won't admit it, but CUSA is now at best on par with the SB and probably a notch below. I don't see the SB contrsct taking a hit. If anything we're in a better bargaining position.

(05-28-2016 05:26 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  CUSA knuckleheads have received their reality check. Sun Belt, MAC, and CUSA are all in the same boat for all practical purposes. So what if CUSA makes 2.5x Sun Belt per school in TV money?

ark30inf has put it into perspective perfectly - a few hundred thousand dollars more from ESPN/TV per school isn't going to make or break a 15 to 30 million dollar budget. 300K is 1% of 30 Million. BFD.

Now lets just continue to build our Sun Belt programs and fan bases and it starts with A-State beating Toledo and Utah State this year!

No, we are not in the same boat. The Sun Belt didn't lose a lot of the current power players in the AAC and go looking for media markets to replace them.

This could be part of the problem

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...tes-052816

(05-28-2016 09:09 PM)Tennessee_Eagle Wrote:  This could be part of the problem

http://www.foxsports.com/college-footbal...tes-052816

Yup . .

Which is why I'm not convinced that the SBC will necessarily negotiate a better deal than what CUSA got . . . Hell, if the cord cutting continues, we may be lucky to maintain the current deal . . .

Cord cutting would be a viable answer if Fox didn't just buy half of the Tier 1 Big Ten rights for two and a half times what the FULL Tier 1 rights were worth last time.

(05-28-2016 09:16 PM)T-Dog Wrote:  Cord cutting would be a viable answer if Fox didn't just buy half of the Tier 1 Big Ten rights for two and a half times what the FULL Tier 1 rights were worth last time.

Just guessing here, but I'd say there's probably greater demand for Big 10 programming (P5) than anything the G5 puts out . . . .

Big time programs (sports) will still bring in a Big time return . . . It's the little guys who are going to suffer as the TV landscape changes . . .

(05-28-2016 05:26 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  CUSA knuckleheads have received their reality check. Sun Belt, MAC, and CUSA are all in the same boat for all practical purposes. So what if CUSA makes 2.5x Sun Belt per school in TV money?

ark30inf has put it into perspective perfectly - a few hundred thousand dollars more from ESPN/TV per school isn't going to make or break a 15 to 30 million dollar budget. 300K is 1% of 30 Million. BFD.

Now lets just continue to build our Sun Belt programs and fan bases and it starts with A-State beating Toledo and Utah State this year!

The MAC gets 700k per.school coach cushion money for the big boys but three times more than CUSA.

The SBC will get less than CUSA most likely.
I have to wonder what the MVFC gets.
Besides realignment reasons which are over anyway CUSA getting less is bad news.

The NFL and the P5 are starting to get more weekday games. The future is Internet TV for the small time programs sucks but greed is taking over.

Thosee numbers are only the 2 year portion. The bein deal is for 4 not 3 and raises it. Plus we are still getting distrubutions from the exit fees and the basketball credits that memphis left behind.

It is not what we were getting before the last batch of schools left but not as bad as all these writers are reporting.

(05-28-2016 10:57 PM)Thegoldstandard Wrote:  Thosee numbers are only the 2 year portion. The bein deal is for 4 not 3 and raises it. Plus we are still getting distrubutions from the exit fees and the basketball credits that memphis left behind.

It is not what we were getting before the last batch of schools left but not as bad as all these writers are reporting.

Love to see a link to that effect.

If Al Jazeera Sports is picking third behind ESPN and CBS it is unlikely they are paying a premium price and they are in roughly the same number of homes as CBS Sports even if there no overlap, beIN and CBSSN combined are in fewer homes than ESPN or ESPN2 or FS1. By all accounts ASN the fourth pick wasn't even paying for third pick in the old deal.

Everyone is missing the REAL story here.
No it's not cord-cutting (an overblown meme at least right now)
No it's not about it being a market correction (it is a correction adjusting for the change in line-up to a degree but that's not the significant story).

What makes this truly interesting is the two year deal. Anything under 8 years is cause for raised eyebrows.

Signing a two year deal signals some serious internal problems.
It could be just covering up ears yelling lalalala to not hear the truth hoping that it all gets better in 24 months (really TWELVE months because that's when negotiations get down and dirty).

The problem with that is that this deal is actually designed to minimize revenue.

Now waiting might be a gamble to be played, intentionally taking low dollars today in the hopes of making it up in the next deal.

G5 value comes from ratings and willingness to play in non-standard times and on non-standard dates. On the ratings front, FS1 CUSA ratings were terrible, kicking the can down the road to get some games on ESPN might actually produce greater revenue in two years by changing the baseline on ratings.

But it should also be observed that CUSA exit is tied to TV revenue. That was a post-CUSA 1.0 move tying a portion of exit to making the league whole on the TV deal. CUSA has created a window where schools have wider latitude to exit cheaply.