(02-01-2017 12:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:22 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 10:27 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  I disagree with this completely. The money is pretty much everything at this point.

As I've stated before, there is really not a tangible difference between us and the P5 as far as barriers go. The BCS is gone. If we produce a team that is ranked in the top 4, then we should have a team in the playoff. We just happen to have an added bonus of potentially going to a NY6 bowl if we don't have a top 4 team. Everyone seems to scoff at that, but neither of our NY6 teams had any business being in the playoff at 10th and 8th respectively, so who cares.

With the money comes more competitive teams. More competitive teams get better bowl affiliations, and potentially a top 4 team.

I don't agree. The recruits don't get a dime of that tv money. It means nothing to them---and recruiting in the end decides what happens on the field. The top recruits care about being on tv, competing for a national title, and being in major bowls. Being a P5 today means you have a contract with a guaranteed slot in a NYD bowl. The money comes via delivering a solid fan base and P5 ratings. Those are two different things.

Frankly, if we land a contract with a NYD Bowl and have legit access to the playoff (not the pretend access that a stacked and rigged selection committee currently offers), im finewith that---even if we make less than the current P5. That's a power conference and would be considered so by the press. Pay for that conference would be less---but it will look far more like a P5 paycheck than a G5 payheck.

However, to attract NYD bowl contract, average attendance will need to be at least 40K (perhaps even higher). In the end, these bowls want to know they will sell tickets and be full. That's all they really care about.

Money is still a factor. There are SEC defensive coordinators that make about as much as one of our schools' entire assistant coaching staff combined.

I agree---but if you accomplish what Im talking about---we wont be making 2 million a team. We'd likely be in that 10-15 million a team category. Even if we had a NYD contract bowl, we'd never match the pay level of the other more established power conferences because we lack true blue blood anchor teams. We don't have a Michigan, a Ohio St, a Alabama, or a Texas. That's why those conferences command 20-30 million a team.

Look at it like a hurricane. At 40K average attendance, we'd cross from a tropical storm to a minimal category 1 hurricane. The other power conferences would be much more powerful category 3-5 hurricanes. So, our payout would reflect that.

I think you might be giving too much weight to how much tv networks consider game attendance in their decisions to pay out loot. If, for some reason, Hawaii pulled Michigan tv ratings despite not everyone wanting to fly to Hawaii for a game, ESPN would still pay them lots of money.

This was exactly what I was getting at. TV contracts are all about ratings and advertising.

TV advertisements won't get any more valuable from having an extra 8k people attend games.

Consistently higher ratings = more valuable TV spots = higher TV payout

(02-01-2017 12:11 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 12:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:22 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I don't agree. The recruits don't get a dime of that tv money. It means nothing to them---and recruiting in the end decides what happens on the field. The top recruits care about being on tv, competing for a national title, and being in major bowls. Being a P5 today means you have a contract with a guaranteed slot in a NYD bowl. The money comes via delivering a solid fan base and P5 ratings. Those are two different things.

Frankly, if we land a contract with a NYD Bowl and have legit access to the playoff (not the pretend access that a stacked and rigged selection committee currently offers), im finewith that---even if we make less than the current P5. That's a power conference and would be considered so by the press. Pay for that conference would be less---but it will look far more like a P5 paycheck than a G5 payheck.

However, to attract NYD bowl contract, average attendance will need to be at least 40K (perhaps even higher). In the end, these bowls want to know they will sell tickets and be full. That's all they really care about.

Money is still a factor. There are SEC defensive coordinators that make about as much as one of our schools' entire assistant coaching staff combined.

I agree---but if you accomplish what Im talking about---we wont be making 2 million a team. We'd likely be in that 10-15 million a team category. Even if we had a NYD contract bowl, we'd never match the pay level of the other more established power conferences because we lack true blue blood anchor teams. We don't have a Michigan, a Ohio St, a Alabama, or a Texas. That's why those conferences command 20-30 million a team.

Look at it like a hurricane. At 40K average attendance, we'd cross from a tropical storm to a minimal category 1 hurricane. The other power conferences would be much more powerful category 3-5 hurricanes. So, our payout would reflect that.

I think you might be giving too much weight to how much tv networks consider game attendance in their decisions to pay out loot. If, for some reason, Hawaii pulled Michigan tv ratings despite not everyone wanting to fly to Hawaii for a game, ESPN would still pay them lots of money.

This was exactly what I was getting at. TV contracts are all about ratings and advertising.

TV advertisements won't get any more valuable from having an extra 8k people attend games.

Consistently higher ratings = more valuable TV spots = higher TV payout

I hear what your saying and I don't necessarily disagree. I just think that increasing attendance is the key part of the puzzle that affects everything else. Big full stadiums create the P5 atmosphere that draws those big ratings. Those big full stadiums say something about the depth of a conferences support. Those big full stadiums are a HUGE deal to bowls---especially major NYD bowls.

To be treated like a P5---winning your conference MUST mean something. That's the BIGGEST problem for any G5. Beyond the access bowl slot, winning a G5 conference means very little because for 4 out of 5 G5's, there is no significant reward for winning the conference. If the access bowl is off the table---then the champion of the AAC currently wouldn't go to a bowl that's significantly better than the 5th place finisher in the AAC.

There needs to be a major prize for the champ in order to give the championship race context. There needs to be a reason for the casual viewer to care who wins the AAC. That's a major reason those P5 games draw larger audiences from the casual fans. There is a guaranteed prize waiting for the victor (Sugar Bowl, Rose Bowl, Orange Bowls). The AAC can take a big step forward if they can simply land a guaranteed quality bowl against a high quality P5 selection. That would go a long way toward making the AAC championship race "matter" to more casual fans. That in turn would increase ratings over time as more casual fans "care" who wins the AAC. You need high attendance to land a bowl like that. So ratings and attendance are all connected for multiple reasons.....btw---Big full stadiums don't hurt recruiting either---so winning is even affected by attendance.

The first step is TV money. We need enough to be able to enact any legislation that the autonomous 5 think they might one day like to implement. Step two get into that autonomous legislative group. Show them we're on the same wave length. We're here to play and operate at the highest level. Three get an auto-bid to an NY6 bowl (or expanded playoff). Two and three feel like a stretch under the current circumstances but take the first step and the next one gets easier, closer to reality.

(02-01-2017 12:11 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 12:01 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:55 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:22 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(02-01-2017 11:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I don't agree. The recruits don't get a dime of that tv money. It means nothing to them---and recruiting in the end decides what happens on the field. The top recruits care about being on tv, competing for a national title, and being in major bowls. Being a P5 today means you have a contract with a guaranteed slot in a NYD bowl. The money comes via delivering a solid fan base and P5 ratings. Those are two different things.

Frankly, if we land a contract with a NYD Bowl and have legit access to the playoff (not the pretend access that a stacked and rigged selection committee currently offers), im finewith that---even if we make less than the current P5. That's a power conference and would be considered so by the press. Pay for that conference would be less---but it will look far more like a P5 paycheck than a G5 payheck.

However, to attract NYD bowl contract, average attendance will need to be at least 40K (perhaps even higher). In the end, these bowls want to know they will sell tickets and be full. That's all they really care about.

Money is still a factor. There are SEC defensive coordinators that make about as much as one of our schools' entire assistant coaching staff combined.

I agree---but if you accomplish what Im talking about---we wont be making 2 million a team. We'd likely be in that 10-15 million a team category. Even if we had a NYD contract bowl, we'd never match the pay level of the other more established power conferences because we lack true blue blood anchor teams. We don't have a Michigan, a Ohio St, a Alabama, or a Texas. That's why those conferences command 20-30 million a team.

Look at it like a hurricane. At 40K average attendance, we'd cross from a tropical storm to a minimal category 1 hurricane. The other power conferences would be much more powerful category 3-5 hurricanes. So, our payout would reflect that.

I think you might be giving too much weight to how much tv networks consider game attendance in their decisions to pay out loot. If, for some reason, Hawaii pulled Michigan tv ratings despite not everyone wanting to fly to Hawaii for a game, ESPN would still pay them lots of money.

This was exactly what I was getting at. TV contracts are all about ratings and advertising.

TV advertisements won't get any more valuable from having an extra 8k people attend games.

Consistently higher ratings = more valuable TV spots = higher TV payout

To be sure, they're all strongly correlated. The conferences with the higher ratings and TV payouts are also the ones with the larger attendance figures. You'll see some individual exceptions (e.g. Miami is one of the top 10 most valuable schools in all of college football for TV contracts, but a bowl might rather take, say, Ole Miss or Iowa since they have much better attendance and traveling fans compared to Miami), but by and large, they're all intertwined.

Honestly, TV ratings are probably more in the immediate control for the G5 conferences. If there's a school like Houston that, for at least part of this season, is in contention for a playoff spot, then ratings will follow. The TV ratings have actually been more egalitarian in the past 3 years since the CFP system started. Brand names are still preferable, but ratings are becoming more driven by whether a game has an impact on the top 4 playoff race than just brand names alone (which is how it was in the BCS era and before). Now, let's not mistake this for being *easy*. It's still extremely hard to get top level TV ratings *consistently* and also have them be attributed to more than just a fluke season for a particular team. The P5 conferences have a proven *consistent* track record of delivering those ratings. I emphasize *consistency* because TV network executives are paying as much for the "high floor" of a P5 conference (e.g. even in down years, people still watch SEC or Big Ten football) as they are for the ceiling. G5 leagues have shown to have some high ceiling scenarios (e.g. Boise State previously and Houston this past year), but their floors are all very low by comparison (and they're paid accordingly). Once again, *consistency* is the name of the game for TV contracts.

Now, the top bowls are an even tougher nut to crack by comparison. There's absolutely nothing egalitarian about bowl contracts: the top bowls have consistently shown that they want the top brands and high prestige. A G5 league has to convince a bowl that it's more valuable to be locked into a contract with their champ than taking from a pool of P5 schools or having a contract for the #2/#3/#4 pick from a P5 league. That same G5 league also has to convince another P5 league to send one of their highly-ranked teams to that bowl instead of having a P5 vs. P5 matchup. This bowl also has to be worth tens of millions of dollars per year to a TV network and a top line sponsor in the free market... or else it's not actually a top line bowl. In essence, it takes *five* to tango here: the G5 league, a high prestige bowl, another P5 league, a TV network and a top line sponsor. Saying that the AAC or any other G5 league "just" needs to sign with a contract bowl to become rich is like saying that I (as a rec league basketball player) "just" need to sign a contract with an NBA team to become rich. Unless there's a legitimately compelling free market reason for the parties OTHER than the G5 league to sign that's BETTER than the status quo of having as many P5 vs. P5 matchups as possible, then it won't happen.

Remember that Big East 2.0 (the post-Miami/VT/BC defection years) still had Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville and West Virginia... and was NOT able to sign a contract bowl under the BCS system. Their BCS AQ status was grandfathered in essentially as a favor from the other power conference commissioners to former Big East commissioner Mike Tranghese (as they all legitimately respected him personally). However, Big East 2.0 didn't have that BCS AQ status by contract with a BCS bowl, whereas the other 5 power conferences *did* have their BCS AQ status by having a contract with a BCS bowl (which meant that it was irrelevant whether they actually met any of the AQ on-the-field metrics since "contract status" could never be taken away). That concept was then taken to the next level with an explicit categorization of "contract bowls" in the CFP system. All of the G5 leagues combined don't have the lineup of brands that the old Big East 2.0 did, so that's why we see only an access bowl slot for that group (and it's basically a foregone conclusion that the top bowls will only take the G5 access bowl team if *forced* to do so as opposed to actually *wanting* to do so under free market principles).

Frankly, the P5 leagues were pretty cunning here. They made the new contract bowl system superficially more open where they could argue "anyone can be a power conference as long as a conference enters into a contract with one of the contract bowls". Sounds nice in theory, right? However, it actually became more closed than the old BCS system in practicality since there is absolutely NO on-the-field mechanism for the non-power conferences to achieve power status. The P5 knew full well that contract bowls only cared about high prestige brand names... and the P5 had a monopoly on them.

So, the TV ratings item is tough in terms of *consistency*, but there's at least an egalitarian path on paper (even if it's much tougher than what people are giving it credit for). In contrast, the top bowl path isn't egalitarian at all - those top bowls are every bit as exclusive, snobby and prestige-minded as the P5 conferences themselves.

(01-31-2017 10:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-31-2017 08:58 PM)Insane_Baboon Wrote:  

(01-31-2017 08:23 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-31-2017 06:47 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(01-30-2017 02:46 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Well if you look at the streaming services like Playstation vue, they all have Disney/Espn channels as a key piece. CBS sports isn't even available.

I think staying with espn is a must if they can at least double our pay and keep exposure and possibly push the p6 narrative. My guess is we get $4-5 million.

If this is the $$ number, We are not remotely a P6.

We wont really be until we average 40K a game. When the AAC as a league averages 40K per game, we will be hard to ignore. That means you'd probably have 2 or 3 schools averaging around 60K, most schools averaging around 40K, and a couple of Wake Forest stragglers down in the 25-30K range. That would be very similar to the Big East Conference of the BCS era.

I fail to see how bumping our average attendance by 8,500 additional people attending games would make our TV rights worth $20 million more.

Nobody said it would. The Big East didn't get anywhere near 20 million. Thier 2011 offer was about 10 million a team. The Big East was only making about 4 million per team vs everyone else at 15 million or so. But the Big East WAS considered a P5 and DID get a full share of the BCS. Being a power conference doesn't necessarily mean you'll make what the more established power conferences are making. In fact, thats unlikely to ever happen.

Excellent reply, Attackcoog