Seriously...we need new vision.

Last year would have still been too late.

clt is triggered. Our ad is female and cannot man up.

People here had the same demand about Banowsky. Maybe the school leaders are at fault and not some suit in Dallas.

(10-13-2017 03:53 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  People here had the same demand about Banowsky. Maybe the school leaders are at fault and not some suit in Dallas.

I believe both. Stadium/CUSATV are a good idea if the follow through and product is done correctly but it was and has been half assed. Schools were supposed to make their on campus studios and cameras espn quality and haven't. CUSA was supposed to develop a platform for us to view our games and haven't. NO FOLLOW THRU

New vision? Hell just having a vision would be a step up

(10-13-2017 05:06 PM)pilot172000 Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 03:53 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  People here had the same demand about Banowsky. Maybe the school leaders are at fault and not some suit in Dallas.

I believe both. Stadium/CUSATV are a good idea if the follow through and product is done correctly but it was and has been half assed. Schools were supposed to make their on campus studios and cameras espn quality and haven't. CUSA was supposed to develop a platform for us to view our games and haven't. NO FOLLOW THRU

That is about a 3 year project. The goal is to totally go to espn3 for streaming. However after watching stadium last week, i actually prefer it.

When will CUSA ADs/Presidents man-up and tell Judy: "you're fired!"

Not soon enough.

I’m not a Judy fan, believe most know this. But, until the university presidents and AD’s start taking ownership it will not matter. Each should be proactive, stop be complacent has nots. Several are just happy to be here giving the nod to every failure.

Someone mentioned a month or so ago, can’t recall user name, CUSA is expecting a ‘huge’ reduction for next TV deal. Scary considering we’re only getting $200k per team now. Judy, university presidents and AD’s must get CUSA back into ESPN good graces. This Facebook, Twitter crap isn’t the future. A least not financially

Well, ESPN isn't going to be the answer either. Revenue losses year over year each quarter are accelerating and Disney continues to force cuts at the network. The money is only going to go to a select few in the future. The TV money is gone forever.

(10-13-2017 08:28 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Well, ESPN isn't going to be the answer either. Revenue losses year over year each quarter are accelerating and Disney continues to force cuts at the network. The money is only going to go to a select few in the future. The TV money is gone forever.

Must disagree. CUSA small TV revenue could assist ESPN. Essentially getting a product for nothing. Most likely mean week day games. Based on everyone’s attendance it wouldn’t matter. Exposure, this conference needs exposure. Sunbelt has better exposure. Embarrassing

Can someone make the case that the commissioner hasn't done what she's supposed to? Exactly what should the CUSA commissioner be doing that she isn't? I guess I'm someone vague about what a commish does beyond the public-facing aspects of the job. Is there reason to believe, for example, that she bungled the TV deal, or is it a factor of the contract coming up at the worst time for access and money? Was the expansion botched and if so, was that specifically her or was it also an issue with the school presidents? On-field performance? Finances?

I'm not a big fan of how CUSA has performed or appeared in recent years, but I'm also ignorant as to who bears the responsibility for it, or even if there's one person that can dramatically affect change. It seems like it's a complicated issue, but maybe it's not?

I guess what I'm asking is what has the commissioner done to make you think she's not doing the job properly and/or what would a better commissioner have done instead?

(10-13-2017 08:49 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  Can someone make the case that the commissioner hasn't done what she's supposed to? Exactly what should the CUSA commissioner be doing that she isn't? I guess I'm someone vague about what a commish does beyond the public-facing aspects of the job. Is there reason to believe, for example, that she bungled the TV deal, or is it a factor of the contract coming up at the worst time for access and money? Was the expansion botched and if so, was that specifically her or was it also an issue with the school presidents? On-field performance? Finances?

I'm not a big fan of how CUSA has performed or appeared in recent years, but I'm also ignorant as to who bears the responsibility for it, or even if there's one person that can dramatically affect change. It seems like it's a complicated issue, but maybe it's not?

I guess what I'm asking is what has the commissioner done to make you think she's not doing the job properly and/or what would a better commissioner have done instead?

From a job description standard you must look at the position much like a CEO. Commission should put together a strategic plan and manage it. Profitability is the primary driver in addition to placing the conference in a position to be successful. Of course this is high level view but I’m sure you get the point.

Judy can’t take the blame for everything. Much of the going on’s are inherited from previous commissioner. Saying this, what has she done since taking the job? Most understand she was handed a failing model however she’s done zero to improve that model. Just same ole same with Judy. CUSA is regressing to zero exposure. Sure FB and Twitter are cool to some fans however has little to no financial impact for the conference and its universities. In my opinion the question should be, what has she done?? Salary she’s getting is rather impressive to get nothing in return

(10-13-2017 08:43 PM)TheChosenOne Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 08:28 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Well, ESPN isn't going to be the answer either. Revenue losses year over year each quarter are accelerating and Disney continues to force cuts at the network. The money is only going to go to a select few in the future. The TV money is gone forever.

Must disagree. CUSA small TV revenue could assist ESPN. Essentially getting a product for nothing. Most likely mean week day games. Based on everyone’s attendance it wouldn’t matter. Exposure, this conference needs exposure. Sunbelt has better exposure. Embarrassing

Your comment that I responded to was about revenue from TV deal not exposure. Two different things.

(10-13-2017 09:24 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 08:43 PM)TheChosenOne Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 08:28 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Well, ESPN isn't going to be the answer either. Revenue losses year over year each quarter are accelerating and Disney continues to force cuts at the network. The money is only going to go to a select few in the future. The TV money is gone forever.

Must disagree. CUSA small TV revenue could assist ESPN. Essentially getting a product for nothing. Most likely mean week day games. Based on everyone’s attendance it wouldn’t matter. Exposure, this conference needs exposure. Sunbelt has better exposure. Embarrassing

Your comment that I responded to was about revenue from TV deal not exposure. Two different things.

Same applies. ESPN will be looking for cheaper options to fill broadcast time. It wouldn’t take much to beat our current deal. If poster correct regarding upcoming TV expectations it most certainly will not take much.

Since you’ve engaged please share your thoughts how to improve revenue and exposure.

It's not the same. It is very different. If you want exposure then ESPN is the way to go.

If you are expecting more revenue it's not going to come from ESPN. It is most definitely not the same. IMO, the revenue isn't coming no matter who we go with it. That era is over, and that is the point I made initially.

(10-13-2017 09:36 PM)TheChosenOne Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 09:24 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 08:43 PM)TheChosenOne Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 08:28 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Well, ESPN isn't going to be the answer either. Revenue losses year over year each quarter are accelerating and Disney continues to force cuts at the network. The money is only going to go to a select few in the future. The TV money is gone forever.

Must disagree. CUSA small TV revenue could assist ESPN. Essentially getting a product for nothing. Most likely mean week day games. Based on everyone’s attendance it wouldn’t matter. Exposure, this conference needs exposure. Sunbelt has better exposure. Embarrassing

Your comment that I responded to was about revenue from TV deal not exposure. Two different things.

Same applies. ESPN will be looking for cheaper options to fill broadcast time. It wouldn’t take much to beat our current deal. If poster correct regarding upcoming TV expectations it most certainly will not take much.

Since you’ve engaged please share your thoughts how to improve revenue and exposure.

espn had the chance to buy in at a discounted rate 2 years ago....

they refused to do so

So what exactly has CUSA change that would make them spend money on CUSA? Do they look like they are hurting for content? I don't know I hardly watch other than college football.

(10-13-2017 08:43 PM)TheChosenOne Wrote:  

(10-13-2017 08:28 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  Well, ESPN isn't going to be the answer either. Revenue losses year over year each quarter are accelerating and Disney continues to force cuts at the network. The money is only going to go to a select few in the future. The TV money is gone forever.

Must disagree. CUSA small TV revenue could assist ESPN. Essentially getting a product for nothing. Most likely mean week day games. Based on everyone’s attendance it wouldn’t matter. Exposure, this conference needs exposure. Sunbelt has better exposure. Embarrassing

Giving up Saturday games to be on espnu? Hell ******* no!

Here is one way to do this and where I believe it is eventually going anyway.

C-USA needs to pick two streaming platforms. If I'm boss for a day, I'm going with ESPN for one. This Stadium platform intrigues me and believe that's a good potential for the "tier 2."

In negotiating with ESPN, I'm willing to acknowledge what they are ostensibly already telling us without saying it. A national audience isn't tuning into C-USA vs. C-USA game. So, let's all say fine and agree ESPN can't sell C-USA matchups nationally and allow the schools to assume the risk of both the broadcast and revenue it can generate locally. If ESPN will allow us to accept how they already treat us then we ask for as many ESPN 1, ESPN 2, or ESPNU games they can give us whether that's 3, 4, 5 or more games. I can't begin to guess if there is much revenue generated for this handful of games. Perhaps ESPN does nothing more but provide the cost of the equipment and capability to broadcast all other games.

As for every other game, (and this is where the preponderance of the deal is focused) we have the option to be on ESPN3, but ESPN grants the schools the rights to generate its own revenue from local ads. Whatever is generated, ESPN gets a percent (let's say 10%) for using it's brand and resources but ESPN has to front no other costs for production, travel, commentators, etc. Again, if everyone acknowledges it's predominantly local or regional viewers for these games then each school can target its ad sells accordingly - something ESPN can't do as a national network. Those in the league who perform the best in this area generate the most revenue.

Or if the league really does want to provide value to its members then the league takes on the responsibility of ensuring each school has the capability to stream across the ESPN platform, takes on the responsibility of creating regional advertisers and then distributes proceeds evenly across the league. ESPN gets paid for doing virtually nothing, but we have some much needed revenue and an even much more needed access to exposure.

espn's numbers are dropping and it's not close to hitting the bottom. I've said it over and over clicking on a game through a "TV channel" beats streaming. But I've had a change of heart on that somewhat. You can look at this two different ways.

1. CUSA games on "TV" are few
2. CUSA games on some form of TV or streaming are better today than at any point.

Fans are going to *****...that's what we do as fans. But 3 years ago the money was better for our schools but there were actually a lot less games shown where fans could sit at home and watch. Today you might have to search for them and you might have to pay a few dollars to watch some of the games.

But if you really wanted to watch your team play without leaving your home. There's a very good chance 2016 and 2017 you could do that more than at any point in the history of your school. Here's the #1 problem, in my opinion. We want things for free and hand feed to us and if we don't get that we are going to cry like a 3 year old.

So if our hardcore fans refuse to pay $10 a month to watch most CUSA games shown or or take the 5 minutes to search where the game is being streamed. Why do we believe espn will be writing a check for something our hardcore fans don't believe in? It's not this commissioner's fault CUSA screwed espn when they decided to go with Fox. CUSA made a gamble Fox was going to be long term and that failed.

The MAC took less money and stayed with espn and found their spot and kind of got paid for it. We all ***** about the amount this conference is getting paid. But if we are being completely honest.....

most don't give a crap about how much each of our schools are making. Hell most on here are not even season ticket holders or rather watch on TV than drive a hour to watch a home game. Then they ***** about paying $10 to $20 dollars to watch their team play. If your team is not worth $20 to watch them play by being able to sit in front of your TV and watch....

then you really don't give a crap about how much your school is making. Nope you only care about what's better for "me"

I hardly get to watch CUSA football because every Western game is a road game for me. But the bye week and my back keeping me from making the UTEP trip. Gave me a chance to actually watch the streams. I think CUSA hit the jackpot with Stadium and what they put on vs espn3...

if we are talking about viewers Facebook and Twitter has 20x or 30x or more than people getting espn3 . It might be "new" this year but every year it should grow. Five years from now espn3 might be looking up at Stadium