(10-14-2017 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  To be fair---nobody had a clue what the AAC was going to be as a media property in 2013. The CUSA schools moving to the Big East (AAC) hadn't been part of a national TV package for the better part of a decade. Navy wouldn't be part of the package until 2018.... if the AAC even lasted that long...which was in doubt in early 2013.

As for CBS---they can't buy any game from ESPN unless ESPN buys them from the AAC first. Virtually no chance the AAC sells games to ESPN for peanuts so they can resell them to CBS. The AAC knows today that was a mistake and won't repeat it. CBS will have to buy diresct this time around.

As for NBC---they pay 166 million a year for niche sport (yes--Premier is a niche in the US) that gets the same ratings as AAC games. Last week NBC showed an auto auction while the other networks had college football. The AAC is just the kind of bang for the buck economical niche buy that appeals to NBC....especially when if they are buying a smaller 12-15 game package. That's about 10-20 million dollar commitment---about what they offered last time---but this time they know what they are getting. I could be wrong, but if the AAC is all about growing their fan base---I don't see them accepting streaming as a major broadcast partner without a huge premium. I don't see a huge premium being in the cards.

IMHO, the issue if we are talking about NBC is going to be this: Back then, NBC thought that they could get programming on the cheap and from a pure business standpoint, makes sense and knowing full well that ESPN was going to match.

Now if we are talking about NBC(Main Channel), if they are going to make a play there will be no way they give you 4 Million or more per School. Why? Notre Dame is worth more by themselves than the AAC as a whole, especially if the Army/Navy Game is off limits. There is no incentive for them to pay big money, unless they do what CBS did with The Big East and dump everything on their Sports Channel, and even then that would be a stretch......

(10-14-2017 12:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 02:49 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 11:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Correct. However, between that minor ACC loss combined with the loss of 50% of the Big10 inventory---and ESPN has holes to fill.

How did they fill the Big 10 loss this year?

In 2016, they showed the following Big 10 games

ABC = 19
ESPN = 11
ESPN2 = 8
ESPNU = 8
ESPNews = 10

That's 46 games on "rated" channels, and 56 total including ESPNews.

In 2017, ESPN is airing 27 total games. None on ESPNews.

So they have 19 slots to fill this year, next year and 2019 with the Big 10 loss. Pretty sure those spots will be redistributed before the next American deal goes into effect.

Correct. That's the whole point. When ESPN decided to match NBC's low ball offer to an unproven unstable AAC---they didn't really need the inventory. We were replacing lost Big East inventory. Since realignment had provided ESPN with a larger ACC, Big10, and SEC---there wasn't really that many Big East holes left to fill. We were surplus inventory (which explains why ESPN's original offer was much more ESPN3 oriented). They chose to make ESPN News a live sports network on Saturdays to make the AAC deal work. But today---with the loss of 50% of the Big10 inventory (with no expansion in the inventory of thier other ESPN owned properties)----we are part of thier current solution for filling all those vacant Big10 slots. ESPN actually needs AAC inventory.

I would add, under it's new deal with the B1G, ESPN can't show any in conference games on ESPNU and can't show any games at all on ESPNews. This year, it has used its flexibility with respect to OOC games only once, showing only Bowling Green at Michigan St. on ESPNU. Thus, its 38 game ABC/ESPN/2 inventory from 2016 has been reduced by only 12 games to 26 games in 2017.

So, the total freed slots for the entire 2017 season as compared to 2016 actual appearances:

ABC/ESPN/2: 12
ESPNU: 7
ESPNews: 10

And here's the B1G's actual appearances through Week 8:

2016:
ABC: 11
ESPN: 3
ESPN2: 6
ESPNU: 6
ESPNews: 7
TOTAL: 33

2017:
ABC: 11
ESPN: 2
ESPN2: 4
ESPNU: 1
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 18

Just for curiosity, I decided to look at how the ACC, SEC and American's appearances have changes through week 8 (next week) in 2017 from 2016:

ACC Thru Week 8
2016:
ABC: 8
ESPN: 10
ESPN2: 3
ESPNU: 4
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 25

2017:
ABC: 7
ESPN: 12
ESPN2: 7
ESPNU: 4
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 30

American Thru Week 8
2016:
ABC: 2
ESPN: 5
ESPN2: 3
ESPNU: 6
ESPNews: 5
TOTAL: 21

2017:
ABC: 2
ESPN: 4
ESPN2: 2
ESPNU: 10
ESPNews: 3
TOTAL: 21

SEC Thru Week 8
2016:
ESPN: 12
ESPN2: 4
ESPNU: 4
TOTAL: 21

2017:
ESPN: 14
ESPN2: 5
ESPNU: 5
TOTAL: 24

In general, it suggests that the ACC has picked up some of the B1G's ABC/ESPN/2 slots and that the SEC has picked up some of of the B1G's ESPN/2/U slots, but that the American has not. The American's total appearances hasn't changes, but it appears to have upgraded some of its former ESPNews appearances to ESPNU. Here's the total change by network and conference:

ABC: B1G Even, ACC +1, American Even
ESPN: B1G -1, ACC +2, American -1, SEC +2
ESPN2: B1G -2, ACC +4, American -1, SEC +1
ESPNU: B1G -6, ACC Even, American +4, SEC +1
ESPNews: B1G -7, American -2

(10-15-2017 09:42 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-14-2017 12:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 02:49 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 11:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Correct. However, between that minor ACC loss combined with the loss of 50% of the Big10 inventory---and ESPN has holes to fill.

How did they fill the Big 10 loss this year?

In 2016, they showed the following Big 10 games

ABC = 19
ESPN = 11
ESPN2 = 8
ESPNU = 8
ESPNews = 10

That's 46 games on "rated" channels, and 56 total including ESPNews.

In 2017, ESPN is airing 27 total games. None on ESPNews.

So they have 19 slots to fill this year, next year and 2019 with the Big 10 loss. Pretty sure those spots will be redistributed before the next American deal goes into effect.

Correct. That's the whole point. When ESPN decided to match NBC's low ball offer to an unproven unstable AAC---they didn't really need the inventory. We were replacing lost Big East inventory. Since realignment had provided ESPN with a larger ACC, Big10, and SEC---there wasn't really that many Big East holes left to fill. We were surplus inventory (which explains why ESPN's original offer was much more ESPN3 oriented). They chose to make ESPN News a live sports network on Saturdays to make the AAC deal work. But today---with the loss of 50% of the Big10 inventory (with no expansion in the inventory of thier other ESPN owned properties)----we are part of thier current solution for filling all those vacant Big10 slots. ESPN actually needs AAC inventory.

I would add, under it's new deal with the B1G, ESPN can't show any in conference games on ESPNU and can't show any games at all on ESPNews. This year, it has used its flexibility with respect to OOC games only once, showing only Bowling Green at Michigan St. on ESPNU. Thus, its 38 game ABC/ESPN/2 inventory from 2016 has been reduced by only 12 games to 26 games in 2017.

So, the total freed slots for the entire 2017 season as compared to 2016 actual appearances:

ABC/ESPN/2: 12
ESPNU: 7
ESPNews: 10

And here's the B1G's actual appearances through Week 8:

2016:
ABC: 11
ESPN: 3
ESPN2: 6
ESPNU: 6
ESPNews: 7
TOTAL: 33

2017:
ABC: 11
ESPN: 2
ESPN2: 4
ESPNU: 1
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 18

Just for curiosity, I decided to look at how the ACC, SEC and American's appearances have changes through week 8 (next week) in 2017 from 2016:

ACC Thru Week 8
2016:
ABC: 8
ESPN: 10
ESPN2: 3
ESPNU: 4
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 25

2017:
ABC: 7
ESPN: 12
ESPN2: 7
ESPNU: 4
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 30

American Thru Week 8
2016:
ABC: 2
ESPN: 5
ESPN2: 3
ESPNU: 6
ESPNews: 5
TOTAL: 21

2017:
ABC: 2
ESPN: 4
ESPN2: 2
ESPNU: 10
ESPNews: 3
TOTAL: 21

SEC Thru Week 8
2016:
ESPN: 12
ESPN2: 4
ESPNU: 4
TOTAL: 21

2017:
ESPN: 14
ESPN2: 5
ESPNU: 5
TOTAL: 24

In general, it suggests that the ACC has picked up some of the B1G's ABC/ESPN/2 slots and that the SEC has picked up some of of the B1G's ESPN/2/U slots, but that the American has not. The American's total appearances hasn't changes, but it appears to have upgraded some of its former ESPNews appearances to ESPNU. Here's the total change by network and conference:

ABC: B1G Even, ACC +1, American Even
ESPN: B1G -1, ACC +2, American -1, SEC +2
ESPN2: B1G -2, ACC +4, American -1, SEC +1
ESPNU: B1G -6, ACC Even, American +4, SEC +1
ESPNews: B1G -7, American -2

The ACC had a lot of games on ESPN3 in prior years. They got less exposure than the rest of the P5. Now the ACC network will soak up some of that excess inventory when it finally comes on line.

(10-15-2017 11:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  The ACC had a lot of games on ESPN3 in prior years. They got less exposure than the rest of the P5. Now the ACC network will soak up some of that excess inventory when it finally comes on line.

That's why the SEC and ACC are the most important comparisons for the American. The SEC owns all of their respective inventories after CBS (for the SEC) and Raycom (for the ACC) are accounted for. The SEC had quite a few games shown on the SECN as alternative feeds last season, which has been their equivalent of the ACC's ESPN3/ACCN Extra games. Like the ACC, some of those appearances have been eliminated and games upgraded to higher profile networks.

My count is that ACCN Extra games have decreased from 14 to 13 and SECN Alternate feed games have decrease from 7 to 4 through week 8.

(10-15-2017 09:34 AM)lance99 Wrote:  

(10-14-2017 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  To be fair---nobody had a clue what the AAC was going to be as a media property in 2013. The CUSA schools moving to the Big East (AAC) hadn't been part of a national TV package for the better part of a decade. Navy wouldn't be part of the package until 2018.... if the AAC even lasted that long...which was in doubt in early 2013.

As for CBS---they can't buy any game from ESPN unless ESPN buys them from the AAC first. Virtually no chance the AAC sells games to ESPN for peanuts so they can resell them to CBS. The AAC knows today that was a mistake and won't repeat it. CBS will have to buy diresct this time around.

As for NBC---they pay 166 million a year for niche sport (yes--Premier is a niche in the US) that gets the same ratings as AAC games. Last week NBC showed an auto auction while the other networks had college football. The AAC is just the kind of bang for the buck economical niche buy that appeals to NBC....especially when if they are buying a smaller 12-15 game package. That's about 10-20 million dollar commitment---about what they offered last time---but this time they know what they are getting. I could be wrong, but if the AAC is all about growing their fan base---I don't see them accepting streaming as a major broadcast partner without a huge premium. I don't see a huge premium being in the cards.

IMHO, the issue if we are talking about NBC is going to be this: Back then, NBC thought that they could get programming on the cheap and from a pure business standpoint, makes sense and knowing full well that ESPN was going to match.

How many times... and different ways does this ^ have to be explained? Our inventory was acquired “on the cheap” because we were considered as damaged goods—that didn’t have a name. Moreover, NBC wasn’t/isn’t committed to CFB like its competitors.

Now if we are talking about NBC(Main Channel), if they are going to make a play there will be no way they give you 4 Million or more per School. Why? Notre Dame is worth more by themselves than the AAC as a whole, especially if the Army/Navy Game is off limits. There is no incentive for them to pay big money, unless they do what CBS did with The Big East and dump everything on their Sports Channel, and even then that would be a stretch......

If we were able to receive approximately $2 mil per school with an unnamed and unstable product, it’s a high probability that we could get $4 mil per school with our “American” branded and stable product. If NBC would commit $$ to CFB, we could possibly add some MWC schools and provide coast-to-coast content at a fraction of the price paid for a power conference….

My comments ^

(10-15-2017 01:39 PM)Underdog Wrote:  How many times... and different ways does this ^ have to be explained? Our inventory was acquired “on the cheap” because we were considered as damaged goods—that didn’t have a name. Moreover, NBC wasn’t/isn’t committed to CFB like its competitors.

And I am going to keep saying this until I am Blue in the face: Your BASKETBALL is the only reason you got the extra million. Now do I think that you can get 4 Million? Sure, but it will not be from NBC...

Now if we are talking about NBC(Main Channel), if they are going to make a play there will be no way they give you 4 Million or more per School. Why? Notre Dame is worth more by themselves than the AAC as a whole, especially if the Army/Navy Game is off limits. There is no incentive for them to pay big money, unless they do what CBS did with The Big East and dump everything on their Sports Channel, and even then that would be a stretch......

If we were able to receive approximately $2 mil per school with an unnamed and unstable product, it’s a high probability that we could get $4 mil per school with our “American” branded and stable product. If NBC would commit $$ to CFB, we could possibly add some MWC schools and provide coast-to-coast content at a fraction of the price paid for a power conference….


[/color]Please for the love of Smeg let this Pipe Dream go. It is NOT happening, no matter how many of your Conferences Fanboys think that it will.......

My comments ^
[/quote]

Just a note. AAC fans are convinced that their TV rights were undervalued because of the instability of the conference in 2012-13.

"We didn't even have a NAME! We were a completely unknown product!"
When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, you were still known as "the Big East". And many "Aresco League" posters were convinced that you would stay "the Big East".

"Our roster of schools was unstable!"
When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, Louisville and Rutgers were already gone, the C7 was gone, Boise STate was gone. There was still the risk of losing teams to an expanding P5 conference, but that risk is still there today and will still be there at the end of the current deal in 2020. Posters on CSNBBS from the incoming schools were irate at the division of the "Realignment Reserve Fund", but the administrations seemed pretty calm about it. I thought the new schools would kick hard enough to get their entry fees waived (which would have been totally fair, given that they "bought into" a BCS conference, and ended up in a G5 conference without the C7), but that didn't even happen. Yes, there were some wild media rumors about forming an entirely new conference, but you won't get an autobid for 8 years by NCAA rules. Nobody was going back to CUSA.

"Our schools hadn't been on real TV in 10 years."
This is true, and a better poinyt than the others, but most of the AAC keystones were keystones of a CUSA that got a TV contract much bigger than the MAC or WAC and right around what the Mountain West was getting. Which is right where you are now.

(10-15-2017 11:48 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-15-2017 09:42 AM)orangefan Wrote:  

(10-14-2017 12:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 02:49 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 11:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Correct. However, between that minor ACC loss combined with the loss of 50% of the Big10 inventory---and ESPN has holes to fill.

How did they fill the Big 10 loss this year?

In 2016, they showed the following Big 10 games

ABC = 19
ESPN = 11
ESPN2 = 8
ESPNU = 8
ESPNews = 10

That's 46 games on "rated" channels, and 56 total including ESPNews.

In 2017, ESPN is airing 27 total games. None on ESPNews.

So they have 19 slots to fill this year, next year and 2019 with the Big 10 loss. Pretty sure those spots will be redistributed before the next American deal goes into effect.

Correct. That's the whole point. When ESPN decided to match NBC's low ball offer to an unproven unstable AAC---they didn't really need the inventory. We were replacing lost Big East inventory. Since realignment had provided ESPN with a larger ACC, Big10, and SEC---there wasn't really that many Big East holes left to fill. We were surplus inventory (which explains why ESPN's original offer was much more ESPN3 oriented). They chose to make ESPN News a live sports network on Saturdays to make the AAC deal work. But today---with the loss of 50% of the Big10 inventory (with no expansion in the inventory of thier other ESPN owned properties)----we are part of thier current solution for filling all those vacant Big10 slots. ESPN actually needs AAC inventory.

I would add, under it's new deal with the B1G, ESPN can't show any in conference games on ESPNU and can't show any games at all on ESPNews. This year, it has used its flexibility with respect to OOC games only once, showing only Bowling Green at Michigan St. on ESPNU. Thus, its 38 game ABC/ESPN/2 inventory from 2016 has been reduced by only 12 games to 26 games in 2017.

So, the total freed slots for the entire 2017 season as compared to 2016 actual appearances:

ABC/ESPN/2: 12
ESPNU: 7
ESPNews: 10

And here's the B1G's actual appearances through Week 8:

2016:
ABC: 11
ESPN: 3
ESPN2: 6
ESPNU: 6
ESPNews: 7
TOTAL: 33

2017:
ABC: 11
ESPN: 2
ESPN2: 4
ESPNU: 1
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 18

Just for curiosity, I decided to look at how the ACC, SEC and American's appearances have changes through week 8 (next week) in 2017 from 2016:

ACC Thru Week 8
2016:
ABC: 8
ESPN: 10
ESPN2: 3
ESPNU: 4
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 25

2017:
ABC: 7
ESPN: 12
ESPN2: 7
ESPNU: 4
ESPNews: 0
TOTAL: 30

American Thru Week 8
2016:
ABC: 2
ESPN: 5
ESPN2: 3
ESPNU: 6
ESPNews: 5
TOTAL: 21

2017:
ABC: 2
ESPN: 4
ESPN2: 2
ESPNU: 10
ESPNews: 3
TOTAL: 21

SEC Thru Week 8
2016:
ESPN: 12
ESPN2: 4
ESPNU: 4
TOTAL: 21

2017:
ESPN: 14
ESPN2: 5
ESPNU: 5
TOTAL: 24

In general, it suggests that the ACC has picked up some of the B1G's ABC/ESPN/2 slots and that the SEC has picked up some of of the B1G's ESPN/2/U slots, but that the American has not. The American's total appearances hasn't changes, but it appears to have upgraded some of its former ESPNews appearances to ESPNU. Here's the total change by network and conference:

ABC: B1G Even, ACC +1, American Even
ESPN: B1G -1, ACC +2, American -1, SEC +2
ESPN2: B1G -2, ACC +4, American -1, SEC +1
ESPNU: B1G -6, ACC Even, American +4, SEC +1
ESPNews: B1G -7, American -2

The ACC had a lot of games on ESPN3 in prior years. They got less exposure than the rest of the P5. Now the ACC network will soak up some of that excess inventory when it finally comes on line.

Again, the ACC network games will not come from the ESPN current supply. The ACC Network will be taking over the Raycom and RSN games. For example this years week 7 games, NCSU vs Pitt and UNC vs UVA would have been on the linear network in 2019. Rumors have been ESPNNEWs could become the ACC Network landing spot. No one will know into 2019.

I do think looking at this year's breakdown of where AAC lands on ESPN is a great indicator of where the AAC and ESPN fill in slots. Excellent work!

There is something to be said for the AAC being the 6th best football conference.

If you take the P5 and the best 4 programs that is only 20 programs not a lot to show on TV. The AAC has some product, not game of the week level product but enough to have serious interest in it.

The top 50% of the AAC is as valuable in FB from a TV standpoint as the bottom 50% of the ACC. Therefore the AAC should be worth at least a quarter of the ACC (5 million per school).

SMU, Tulsa and Tulane are not too good but also not what you'll see on TV.

UCF, USF, UC, Houston, Memphis, Navy, Temple that is the face of the football conference. UConn and ECU are down but important when good.

(10-17-2017 11:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Just a note. AAC fans are convinced that their TV rights were undervalued because of the instability of the conference in 2012-13.

"We didn't even have a NAME! We were a completely unknown product!"
When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, you were still known as "the Big East". And many "Aresco League" posters were convinced that you would stay "the Big East".

"Our roster of schools was unstable!"
When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, Louisville and Rutgers were already gone, the C7 was gone, Boise STate was gone. There was still the risk of losing teams to an expanding P5 conference, but that risk is still there today and will still be there at the end of the current deal in 2020. Posters on CSNBBS from the incoming schools were irate at the division of the "Realignment Reserve Fund", but the administrations seemed pretty calm about it. I thought the new schools would kick hard enough to get their entry fees waived (which would have been totally fair, given that they "bought into" a BCS conference, and ended up in a G5 conference without the C7), but that didn't even happen. Yes, there were some wild media rumors about forming an entirely new conference, but you won't get an autobid for 8 years by NCAA rules. Nobody was going back to CUSA.

"Our schools hadn't been on real TV in 10 years."
This is true, and a better poinyt than the others, but most of the AAC keystones were keystones of a CUSA that got a TV contract much bigger than the MAC or WAC and right around what the Mountain West was getting. Which is right where you are now.

The big change in stability for the American was a direct result of the ACC signing a GOR (April 2013). Unfortunately for the AAC, the ACC GOR occurred well AFTER the AAC had already struck a deal with NBC (Feb 2013). The ACC GOR is what stopped the realignment merry go round.

Sure every AAC team would leave today for a P5---but with the current GOR's and the outcome of the 2016 Big12 expansion sweepstakes---we know there isnt going to be any P5's expanding or poaching until the current GOR's expire around 2024-25. We have stability.

The biggest difference for the AAC between 2013 and today---outside of stability---is the AAC now has a track record. Its ability to attract an audience, its TV ratings, and its performance on the field are no longer unknown quantities. Those factors are known by all potential bidders. That might be the biggest single significant difference between 2013 and today when it comes to the AAC's potential value.

(10-17-2017 07:53 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  There is something to be said for the AAC being the 6th best football conference.

If you take the P5 and the best 4 programs that is only 20 programs not a lot to show on TV. The AAC has some product, not game of the week level product but enough to have serious interest in it.

The top 50% of the AAC is as valuable in FB from a TV standpoint as the bottom 50% of the ACC. Therefore the AAC should be worth at least a quarter of the ACC (5 million per school).

I still expect the American to land somewhere in the 5 million to 8 million range in the next deal. Best case scenario would be to break up the deal.

Tier 1 football NBC over the air Saturday
Tier 2 football ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU weeknight games.
Tier 3 football some combination of CBSSN, NBC Sports, ESPNU/ESPNews/ESPN3

Tier 1 Basketball CBS/NBC weekend games
Tier 2 Basketball ESPN family of Networks/CBSSN sub license agreement for everything else.

(10-17-2017 11:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Just a note. AAC fans are convinced that their TV rights were undervalued because of the instability of the conference in 2012-13.

Yes… you’re correct, but there are many reasons why we believe this—which you intentionally failed to mention. As a Moderator whom I’ve interacted with in the past, I’m very surprised at this twisted post you’ve presented because I know that you have full knowledge of most—if not all—the unfortunate and unforeseen circumstances that “The American” encountered.

"We didn't even have a NAME! We were a completely unknown product!"

UC, UCONN, and USF sold the name to the C7; thus, our rebuilding conference didn't have one. Consequently, “We were a completely unknown product!"

When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, you were still known as "the Big East". And many "Aresco League" posters were convinced that you would stay "the Big East".

How the H#LL can two conferences (the C7/Big East and the Big East/the nameless ones/The American) sign TV contracts with two different networks using the same name?

"Our roster of schools was unstable!"

Aresco unconscionably admitted during Tulsa's invite interview that at one point, he didn’t think the conference would make it. This also explains why "Mr. TV Expert Commissioner" allowed our schools (which were in an unnamed conference at the time) to be placed into two groups by NBC (if I’m not mistaken) and ESPN matched the TV contract—but you already know this….

When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, Louisville and Rutgers were already gone, the C7 was gone, Boise STate was gone. There was still the risk of losing teams to an expanding P5 conference, but that risk is still there today and will still be there at the end of the current deal in 2020. Posters on CSNBBS from the incoming schools were irate at the division of the "Realignment Reserve Fund", but the administrations seemed pretty calm about it. I thought the new schools would kick hard enough to get their entry fees waived (which would have been totally fair, given that they "bought into" a BCS conference, and ended up in a G5 conference without the C7), but that didn't even happen. Yes, there were some wild media rumors about forming an entirely new conference, but you won't get an autobid for 8 years by NCAA rules. Nobody was going back to CUSA.

It was more than a rumor:

“UConn, Cincy looking to form a Transcontinental Conference”

https://www.mwcconnection.com/2012/12/14...conference

However, I admit that this was caused by panic—which further emphasizes how dire the situation was.

"Our schools hadn't been on real TV in 10 years."

This is true, and a better poinyt than the others, but most of the AAC keystones were keystones of a CUSA that got a TV contract much bigger than the MAC or WAC and right around what the Mountain West was getting. Which is right where you are now.

Do you think FOX would have paid a nameless C7 BBall conference approximately $5 mil per school? NO! That’s why the C7 left behind MILLION$ to UC, UCONN, and USF for the “Big East” name... but you already know this....

My comments ^ are in bold….

(10-18-2017 09:41 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(10-17-2017 11:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Just a note. AAC fans are convinced that their TV rights were undervalued because of the instability of the conference in 2012-13.

Yes… you’re correct, but there are many reasons why we believe this—which you intentionally failed to mention.

I thought I'd covered the main points. I still don't see any new ones in your post, just the same ones we've been arguing over.

Quote:As a Moderator whom I’ve interacted with in the past, I’m very surprised at this twisted post you’ve presented because I know that you have full knowledge of most—if not all—the unfortunate and unforeseen circumstances that “The American” encountered.

"We didn't even have a NAME! We were a completely unknown product!"

UC, UCONN, and USF sold the name to the C7; thus, our rebuilding conference didn't have one. Consequently, “We were a completely unknown product!"

When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, you were still known as "the Big East". And many "Aresco League" posters were convinced that you would stay "the Big East".
[/quote]

I repeat: The sale of the name took place AFTER Aresco signed the TV contracts with NBC and ESPN. The sale of the name was by no means a certainty when those deals were being negotiated.

Thread title: It's official, BE signs with ESPN (Feb 23)

I'm done googling. We'll have to settle for this thread from MArch 2, where the sale of the name is still up in the air. http://mac.csnbbs.com/thread-621559.htmlc7 board thread from MArch 2, 2013

Quote:How the H#LL can two conferences (the C7/Big East and the Big East/the nameless ones/The American) sign TV contracts with two different networks using the same name?

That's why they get paid the big bucks, because they're not brain-damaged enough to sign a deal to buy SMU football from the guys selling Georgetown basketball or vice versa.

Quote:"Our roster of schools was unstable!"

Aresco unconscionably admitted during Tulsa's invite interview that at one point, he didn’t think the conference would make it.

At that point, the danger had passed--there was a TV deal in place.

Quote:This also explains why "Mr. TV Expert Commissioner" allowed our schools (which were in an unnamed conference at the time) to be placed into two groups by NBC (if I’m not mistaken) and ESPN matched the TV contract—but you already know this….

It was more than a rumor:

“UConn, Cincy looking to form a Transcontinental Conference”

https://www.mwcconnection.com/2012/12/14...conference

Thanks. I could NOT find that link yesterday. The "Transcontinental Conference" was never a real prospect, though, more a "harebrained scheme" that evaporates when you take it seriously, like UConn putting football in the MAC. (Or it might just have been a harebrained scheme to panic the ACC into inviting UConn and Cincy.)

Quote:However, I admit that this was caused by panic—which further emphasizes how dire the situation was.

"Our schools hadn't been on real TV in 10 years."

This is true, and a better poinyt than the others, but most of the AAC keystones were keystones of a CUSA that got a TV contract much bigger than the MAC or WAC and right around what the Mountain West was getting. Which is right where you are now.

Do you think FOX would have paid a nameless C7 BBall conference approximately $5 mil per school? NO! That’s why the C7 left behind MILLION$ to UC, UCONN, and USF for the “Big East” name... but you already know this....

Probably not $4M a year, but probably $2.5-$3M for the "Eastern Athletic Association" or whatever. And I don't think the Aresco-led "Big East Conference" was going to be getting $3-4M per school per year either. Which is why, on your end, it made sense to sell the name. Georgetown-St Johns has more value as a "Big East game". MEmphis-Temple, not so much.

(10-18-2017 11:44 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(10-18-2017 09:41 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(10-17-2017 11:36 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Just a note. AAC fans are convinced that their TV rights were undervalued because of the instability of the conference in 2012-13.

Yes… you’re correct, but there are many reasons why we believe this—which you intentionally failed to mention.

I thought I'd covered the main points. I still don't see any new ones in your post, just the same ones we've been arguing over.

Quote:As a Moderator whom I’ve interacted with in the past, I’m very surprised at this twisted post you’ve presented because I know that you have full knowledge of most—if not all—the unfortunate and unforeseen circumstances that “The American” encountered.

"We didn't even have a NAME! We were a completely unknown product!"

UC, UCONN, and USF sold the name to the C7; thus, our rebuilding conference didn't have one. Consequently, “We were a completely unknown product!"

When Aresco signed with NBC and then ESPN, you were still known as "the Big East". And many "Aresco League" posters were convinced that you would stay "the Big East".

I repeat: The sale of the name took place AFTER Aresco signed the TV contracts with NBC and ESPN. The sale of the name was by no means a certainty when those deals were being negotiated.

Thread title: It's official, BE signs with ESPN (Feb 23)

I'm done googling. We'll have to settle for this thread from MArch 2, where the sale of the name is still up in the air. http://mac.csnbbs.com/thread-621559.htmlc7 board thread from MArch 2, 2013

Quote:How the H#LL can two conferences (the C7/Big East and the Big East/the nameless ones/The American) sign TV contracts with two different networks using the same name?

That's why they get paid the big bucks, because they're not brain-damaged enough to sign a deal to buy SMU football from the guys selling Georgetown basketball or vice versa.

Quote:"Our roster of schools was unstable!"

Aresco unconscionably admitted during Tulsa's invite interview that at one point, he didn’t think the conference would make it.

At that point, the danger had passed--there was a TV deal in place.

Quote:This also explains why "Mr. TV Expert Commissioner" allowed our schools (which were in an unnamed conference at the time) to be placed into two groups by NBC (if I’m not mistaken) and ESPN matched the TV contract—but you already know this….

It was more than a rumor:

“UConn, Cincy looking to form a Transcontinental Conference”

https://www.mwcconnection.com/2012/12/14...conference

Thanks. I could NOT find that link yesterday. The "Transcontinental Conference" was never a real prospect, though, more a "harebrained scheme" that evaporates when you take it seriously, like UConn putting football in the MAC. (Or it might just have been a harebrained scheme to panic the ACC into inviting UConn and Cincy.)

Quote:However, I admit that this was caused by panic—which further emphasizes how dire the situation was.

"Our schools hadn't been on real TV in 10 years."

This is true, and a better poinyt than the others, but most of the AAC keystones were keystones of a CUSA that got a TV contract much bigger than the MAC or WAC and right around what the Mountain West was getting. Which is right where you are now.

Do you think FOX would have paid a nameless C7 BBall conference approximately $5 mil per school? NO! That’s why the C7 left behind MILLION$ to UC, UCONN, and USF for the “Big East” name... but you already know this....

Probably not $4M a year, but probably $2.5-$3M for the "Eastern Athletic Association" or whatever. And I don't think the Aresco-led "Big East Conference" was going to be getting $3-4M per school per year either. Which is why, on your end, it made sense to sell the name. Georgetown-St Johns has more value as a "Big East game". MEmphis-Temple, not so much.
[/quote]

Selling the “Big East” name subsequent to signing a TV contract would have voided it, but please prove me wrong by providing a link… and I’ll rep you +6 for the effort, correct information, and link….

Btw... I'll continue to untwist the rest of your twisted post later....

(10-18-2017 12:06 PM)Underdog Wrote:  Selling the “Big East” name subsequent to signing a TV contract would have voided it, but please prove me wrong by providing a link… and I’ll rep you +6 for the effort, correct information, and link….

Btw... I'll continue to untwist the rest of your twisted post later....

I'm not sure what you're asking here.

I can't produce a link to what Fox would have paid the C7 without the Big East name--I don't have access to that. I'd argue that Fox and the C7 could not be sure that they would get the rights to the name, so I'd expect that part of the deal was a contingency if the C7 ended up not being the Big East, or not being able to start for the 2013-14 Fox Sports 1 debut. What that contingency was (or even that there was one) has never been made public. Maybe the contingency was "void the deal", I don't know.

I produced links to discussions of the TV deal the Aresco League signed as the "Big East", that was not voided when they sold the name.

Please Dear God, let Aresco get this contract done ASAP just to kill this speculation topic!

@johnbragg

Here’s a link to a thread when selling the “Big East” name was discussed:

http://www.ncaanetwork.net/thread-607884...pid8715906

I’m also trying to uncover when the “American” board was renamed because I can’t remember. Moreover, the link that you provided in your post does support what you claim. Nevertheless, I would prefer a more creditable source than this message board—but what I’ve uncovered does weigh heavily in your favor. My point: I will still rep you +6 if I can’t prove what you posted is not correct….

Andy Katz reports the "Big East"-ESPN deal is done on February 23, 2013.
https://twitter.com/TheAndyKatz/status/3...5793745921

The deal to sell the name (and the MSG Tournament) was official on MArch 20, 2013. Big East History (official Big East site). The deal seems to have been in place by MArch 1 (Sources tell Brett McMurphy), but the deal was not completed and the Fox Sports 1 announcement was delayed until March 20.

As for using csnbbs links, I don't think anybody was following developments more closely than this board, and the links to csnbbs threads aren't going to end in 404 errors, even if a lot of the articles we linked to are 404'd by now.

There were plenty of threads about the sale of the name being discussed. That discussion started as soon as the rumblings of a split started. But discussion and happening are two very different things.

(10-18-2017 01:45 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Andy Katz reports the "Big East"-ESPN deal is done on February 23, 2013.
https://twitter.com/TheAndyKatz/status/3...5793745921

The deal to sell the name (and the MSG Tournament) was official on MArch 20, 2013. Big East History (official Big East site). The deal seems to have been in place by MArch 1 (Sources tell Brett McMurphy), but the deal was not completed and the Fox Sports 1 announcement was delayed until March 20.

As for using csnbbs links, I don't think anybody was following developments more closely than this board, and the links to csnbbs threads aren't going to end in 404 errors, even if a lot of the articles we linked to are 404'd by now.

There were plenty of threads about the sale of the name being discussed. That discussion started as soon as the rumblings of a split started. But discussion and happening are two very different things.

Well done sir… +6…. My memory had faded with age… lol….