EDLUVAR
1st String
Posts: 1,865
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 40
I Root For: Boise St.
Location: Boise Idaho
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 03:11 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:07 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:02 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote: (07-20-2016 10:55 PM)UNLVFan90 Wrote: If you guys are left behind in the Big 12 sweepstakes and the MWC has no casualties would you guys join the MWC?
No equal revenue distribution.
End of discussion.
Signed navy with its own TV deal making more than its conference mates. Or UT Austin who makes more than all its big12 partners lol.
Navy had an existing TV deal. When it comes up again look for it to be included into the AAC slate.
But to your point about UT that is not their Tier 1 deal. Boise is making a killing and other programs are getting chump change if anything on the MWC Tier 1 deal.
Only a Boise fan would think that TV deal is fair. Don't get me wrong you are pretty much the only thing worth watching in the MWC but that's not the point.
The fact that AAC fans know so little about the MWC contract makes me scratch my head why they feel the need to comment on it. Navy said they won't take less $ and would add their inventory to the aac's if it will make theme more $. It won't so look for them to keep their own deal in place. The fact that ESPN wanted BSU and offered them their own deal to share with the MWC bennifited the conference, and it's tv viewership numbers support that decision.
|
|
07-21-2016 03:16 PM |
|
GO Coogs GO!!!
All American
Posts: 2,847
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 59
I Root For: Houston
Location:
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 03:16 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: The fact that AAC fans know so little about the MWC contract makes me scratch my head why they feel the need to comment on it. Navy said they won't take less $ and would add their inventory to the aac's if it will make theme more $. It won't so look for them to keep their own deal in place. The fact that ESPN wanted BSU and offered them their own deal to share with the MWC bennifited the conference, and it's tv viewership numbers support that decision.
Please explain how this is equal distribution?
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/c.../77097290/
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blo...ice-tv-pie
We don't want to come so it's all academic.
|
|
07-21-2016 03:21 PM |
|
EDLUVAR
1st String
Posts: 1,865
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 40
I Root For: Boise St.
Location: Boise Idaho
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 03:21 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:16 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: The fact that AAC fans know so little about the MWC contract makes me scratch my head why they feel the need to comment on it. Navy said they won't take less $ and would add their inventory to the aac's if it will make theme more $. It won't so look for them to keep their own deal in place. The fact that ESPN wanted BSU and offered them their own deal to share with the MWC bennifited the conference, and it's tv viewership numbers support that decision.
Please explain how this is equal distribution?
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/c.../77097290/
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blo...ice-tv-pie
We don't want to come so it's all academic.
Well that's bonus money, seperate from the tv contract that was negotiated without bsu, before they bailed on the AAC. MWC commish said they wouldn't have recieved any of it without bsu, and all of its games would have been on cbs sports. It's pretty much the same model the big 12 was operating on before Colorado and Nebraska bailed because of Texass longhorn network. So perhaps the teams would be interested in getting no money from ESPN and all make less to equal things out. Personally I think, and MWC teamed voted, they would prefere getting more money and being on ESPN. Thanks for your concern though. I don't see any programs going from the MWC to the AAC, or vice Versa. Bottom dwelling additions on both sides have created pairity.
|
|
07-21-2016 03:35 PM |
|
pesik
Legend
Posts: 26,442
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 817
I Root For: Houston
Location:
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 03:35 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:21 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:16 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: The fact that AAC fans know so little about the MWC contract makes me scratch my head why they feel the need to comment on it. Navy said they won't take less $ and would add their inventory to the aac's if it will make theme more $. It won't so look for them to keep their own deal in place. The fact that ESPN wanted BSU and offered them their own deal to share with the MWC bennifited the conference, and it's tv viewership numbers support that decision.
Please explain how this is equal distribution?
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/c.../77097290/
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blo...ice-tv-pie
We don't want to come so it's all academic.
Well that's bonus money, seperate from the tv contract that was negotiated without bsu, before they bailed on the AAC. MWC commish said they wouldn't have recieved any of it without bsu, and all of its games would have been on cbs sports. It's pretty much the same model the big 12 was operating on before Colorado and Nebraska bailed because of Texass longhorn network. So perhaps the teams would be interested in getting no money from ESPN and all make less to equal things out. Personally I think, and MWC teamed voted, they would prefere getting more money and being on ESPN. Thanks for your concern though. I don't see any programs going from the MWC to the AAC, or vice Versa. Bottom dwelling additions on both sides have created pairity.
thats a very texas statement of you
The reality is half the mwc would be in the AAC today if boise wasnt greedy..
unlvs president has already spoken against te deal..
IMO fresno, ulnv and sdsu would rather have had boise not be greedy gotten 2 miilion and been on espn every game..than 1.2 million while a "partner" gets 4.5 million and only on espn once a season
|
|
07-21-2016 05:59 PM |
|
EDLUVAR
1st String
Posts: 1,865
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 40
I Root For: Boise St.
Location: Boise Idaho
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 05:59 PM)pesik Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:35 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:21 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:16 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: The fact that AAC fans know so little about the MWC contract makes me scratch my head why they feel the need to comment on it. Navy said they won't take less $ and would add their inventory to the aac's if it will make theme more $. It won't so look for them to keep their own deal in place. The fact that ESPN wanted BSU and offered them their own deal to share with the MWC bennifited the conference, and it's tv viewership numbers support that decision.
Please explain how this is equal distribution?
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/c.../77097290/
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blo...ice-tv-pie
We don't want to come so it's all academic.
Well that's bonus money, seperate from the tv contract that was negotiated without bsu, before they bailed on the AAC. MWC commish said they wouldn't have recieved any of it without bsu, and all of its games would have been on cbs sports. It's pretty much the same model the big 12 was operating on before Colorado and Nebraska bailed because of Texass longhorn network. So perhaps the teams would be interested in getting no money from ESPN and all make less to equal things out. Personally I think, and MWC teamed voted, they would prefere getting more money and being on ESPN. Thanks for your concern though. I don't see any programs going from the MWC to the AAC, or vice Versa. Bottom dwelling additions on both sides have created pairity.
thats a very texas statement of you
The reality is half the mwc would be in the AAC today if boise wasnt greedy..
unlvs president has already spoken against te deal..
IMO fresno, ulnv and sdsu would rather have had boise not be greedy gotten 2 miilion and been on espn every game..than 1.2 million while a "partner" gets 4.5 million and only on espn once a season
I believe the AAC either tried and couldn't get those teams or thought Tulane and Tulsa were west enough and good enough. Probably thought they had bsu over a barrel either way. Had those teams been added instead of cusa teams I doubt bsu and sdsu would have left.
|
|
07-21-2016 07:12 PM |
|
slhNavy91
Heisman
Posts: 7,851
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 1622
I Root For: Navy
Location:
|
Re: RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 03:35 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:21 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:16 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: The fact that AAC fans know so little about the MWC contract makes me scratch my head why they feel the need to comment on it. Navy said they won't take less $ and would add their inventory to the aac's if it will make theme more $. It won't so look for them to keep their own deal in place. The fact that ESPN wanted BSU and offered them their own deal to share with the MWC bennifited the conference, and it's tv viewership numbers support that decision.
Please explain how this is equal distribution?
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/c.../77097290/
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blo...ice-tv-pie
We don't want to come so it's all academic.
Well that's bonus money, seperate from the tv contract that was negotiated without bsu, before they bailed on the AAC. MWC commish said they wouldn't have recieved any of it without bsu, and all of its games would have been on cbs sports. It's pretty much the same model the big 12 was operating on before Colorado and Nebraska bailed because of Texass longhorn network. So perhaps the teams would be interested in getting no money from ESPN and all make less to equal things out. Personally I think, and MWC teamed voted, they would prefere getting more money and being on ESPN. Thanks for your concern though. I don't see any programs going from the MWC to the AAC, or vice Versa. Bottom dwelling additions on both sides have created pairity.
The bonus money is not "separate" from the TV deal. It is the same pot of money being distributed inequitably.
There are news stories from the local papers of EVERY mwc school bemoaning the fact that they are getting MILLIONS less than Boise Community College.
It is laughable that you equate this inequity with the honoring of a pre-existing contract when Navy has been all-in with the American's ongoing efforts.
You are butthurt that Navy AD was the public voice saying that the AAC said no to BCC's extortion efforts, the mwc said "yes", good luck with that. Now the other 11 schools don't like the taste, but you are in denial that Boise Community College's selfishness weakens the conference ad a whole.
|
|
07-21-2016 08:04 PM |
|
EDLUVAR
1st String
Posts: 1,865
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 40
I Root For: Boise St.
Location: Boise Idaho
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 08:04 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:35 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:21 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote: (07-21-2016 03:16 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: The fact that AAC fans know so little about the MWC contract makes me scratch my head why they feel the need to comment on it. Navy said they won't take less $ and would add their inventory to the aac's if it will make theme more $. It won't so look for them to keep their own deal in place. The fact that ESPN wanted BSU and offered them their own deal to share with the MWC bennifited the conference, and it's tv viewership numbers support that decision.
Please explain how this is equal distribution?
http://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/c.../77097290/
http://www.reviewjournal.com/columns-blo...ice-tv-pie
We don't want to come so it's all academic.
Well that's bonus money, seperate from the tv contract that was negotiated without bsu, before they bailed on the AAC. MWC commish said they wouldn't have recieved any of it without bsu, and all of its games would have been on cbs sports. It's pretty much the same model the big 12 was operating on before Colorado and Nebraska bailed because of Texass longhorn network. So perhaps the teams would be interested in getting no money from ESPN and all make less to equal things out. Personally I think, and MWC teamed voted, they would prefere getting more money and being on ESPN. Thanks for your concern though. I don't see any programs going from the MWC to the AAC, or vice Versa. Bottom dwelling additions on both sides have created pairity.
The bonus money is not "separate" from the TV deal. It is the same pot of money being distributed inequitably.
There are news stories from the local papers of EVERY mwc school bemoaning the fact that they are getting MILLIONS less than Boise Community College.
It is laughable that you equate this inequity with the honoring of a pre-existing contract when Navy has been all-in with the American's ongoing efforts.
You are butthurt that Navy AD was the public voice saying that the AAC said no to BCC's extortion efforts, the mwc said "yes", good luck with that. Now the other 11 schools don't like the taste, but you are in denial that Boise Community College's selfishness weakens the conference ad a whole.
It's actually seperate. Cbs contract is not the same as the ESPN contract. Stay classy Navy. IMO your ad is a huge douche and hypocrite.
|
|
07-21-2016 08:38 PM |
|
slhNavy91
Heisman
Posts: 7,851
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 1622
I Root For: Navy
Location:
|
RE: Houston fans
We all get it, you don't like Chet. Oddly, the AAC commissioner seems pretty simpatico with him, and none of the fans of other AAC teams have supported your anti-Navy campaign in any way. Because Navy has so far proven to be committed to the success of the conference as a whole there is no hue and cry about the honoring of a pre-existing contract. By contrast, EVERY mwc hometown paper outside the potato state has come out opposed to the inequitable revenue distribution.
Navy and all its TV value will be part of the AAC negotiation/re-negotiation. It is still possible that an AAC weakened by the current expansion round could get so bad a deal that Navy can invoke a reported (unconfirmed) no-less-than clause and be an animal more equal than others. But that is currently a lot of supposition based on quotes from a 2013 interview rather than reporting uncovering actual contract language.
IF that happens, though, c'mon back and I'll eat crow. Until then your claims of hypocrisy are empty blather.
|
|
07-21-2016 09:21 PM |
|
texcane1982
2nd String
Posts: 303
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 10
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
|
RE: Houston fans
I'm sure ECU could return to the CAA for Olympic sports.
|
|
07-21-2016 09:25 PM |
|
billybobby777
The REAL BillyBobby
Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 09:21 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote: We all get it, you don't like Chet. Oddly, the AAC commissioner seems pretty simpatico with him, and none of the fans of other AAC teams have supported your anti-Navy campaign in any way. Because Navy has so far proven to be committed to the success of the conference as a whole there is no hue and cry about the honoring of a pre-existing contract. By contrast, EVERY mwc hometown paper outside the potato state has come out opposed to the inequitable revenue distribution.
Navy and all its TV value will be part of the AAC negotiation/re-negotiation. It is still possible that an AAC weakened by the current expansion round could get so bad a deal that Navy can invoke a reported (unconfirmed) no-less-than clause and be an animal more equal than others. But that is currently a lot of supposition based on quotes from a 2013 interview rather than reporting uncovering actual contract language.
IF that happens, though, c'mon back and I'll eat crow. Until then your claims of hypocrisy are empty blather.
I hope you are correct and after 1 more year Navy is equal to all the others in the AAC. No Boise like deals/exceptions for the Army or ND games. Everyone makes the same or we are the MWC with one team getting a sweetheart tv deal. That will make a lot of people here go bat sh!t crazy.
It has to be equal revenue distribution for the AAC. End of discussion.
Cheers!
(This post was last modified: 07-21-2016 11:26 PM by billybobby777.)
|
|
07-21-2016 11:22 PM |
|
GO Coogs GO!!!
All American
Posts: 2,847
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation: 59
I Root For: Houston
Location:
|
RE: Houston fans
(07-21-2016 08:38 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: It's actually seperate. Cbs contract is not the same as the ESPN contract. Stay classy Navy. IMO your ad is a huge douche and hypocrite.
It is but it is expiring soon and will be brought into the AAC fold.
That said Chet is a tool on that we can agree. He used to be our AD and he was terrible.
|
|
07-22-2016 09:21 AM |
|