clt says what? Usm left?

12 million more for the CUSA 5

The SBC3 aren’t making anymore in the SBC and forking over 12 million.

Sounds like CUSA really took them to the cleaners

(09-22-2022 07:07 PM)ghostofclt! Wrote:  clt says what? Usm left?

They’ll be losing to Bowling Green before you know it!

Once again it is kind of amusing to me how both sides see the exact same thing and both declare victory. I wish I was better at that. I would sure love to see the USM/Miami score and declare victory.

(09-22-2022 08:34 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  Once again it is kind of amusing to me how both sides see the exact same thing and both declare victory. I wish I was better at that. I would sure love to see the USM/Miami score and declare victory.

Till S. Miss get a real coach there's not going to be much of that on the field. But playing in what just might be the weakest division of college football might help add a few wins. That might be the biggest benefit in this move of all for S. Miss...

a below average team should start the season with 4 wins, ULM, Texas St, FCS, Ark St. and based off their history of never finishing a season over .500, most years USA is win #5. Hell even ULL looks like they going to struggle this season and be at best average

(09-22-2022 08:34 PM)Eagleyed Wrote:  Once again it is kind of amusing to me how both sides see the exact same thing and both declare victory. I wish I was better at that. I would sure love to see the USM/Miami score and declare victory.

I think it’s because it was a win for both sides. The SBC3 wanted out really bad and they got their wish. CUSA5 wanted more money and they got their wish. I said many times I thought this 3 would end up paying 1-2 million extra to leave. I’m happy with 1.75 million plus the conference payout.

Also, it took a student newspaper to figure out the amount. If the SBC3 admin were ecstatic about the deal they would have put it out themselves. They know they didn’t “win” but it was a small price to pay in their opinions. I respect that but disagree.

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

CUSA doesn't get revenue for the 3 this season because they're not in CUSA. So the 1.75 is to cover that and a penalty for leaving early.

Much like the AAC6, if USM, ODU, and UM would've stayed, then yes CUSA would've received money for them being in the conference and the revenue would've been withheld.

(09-22-2022 05:25 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 05:15 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

That's a big chunk of their overall budget. Also. why would they not want the AAC6 to know how much they had to pay? Why would they care if we know?

I think it was the conference that didn't want the numbers to be known.

They didn't want rich programs like UNT hearing about how small the buy out ended up being and digging around in their couch cushions and also leaving early. If more than half of the AAC-6 also left last year, that'd have been a problem for the conference (although I assume a waiver would have been forthcoming, since we managed to have enough schools coming in for next season).

The AAC6 had no options for 2022-2023 other than C-USA. The Sunbelt Conference facilitated the early exits by the SBC3.

(09-23-2022 07:08 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

CUSA doesn't get revenue for the 3 this season because they're not in CUSA. So the 1.75 is to cover that and a penalty for leaving early.

Much like the AAC6, if USM, ODU, and UM would've stayed, then yes CUSA would've received money for them being in the conference and the revenue would've been withheld.

C-USA will still get its CFP money, media money and bowl distribution money (plus basketball credits). How much that drops, is still to be determined. The CFP money won’t drop much, if any. The bowl distribution will drop by potentially one bowl (but may not drop at all depending on bowl eligible teams). The media deal is the big question. The pizza size might shrink a little, but it still only being split 5 ways and with us still have the six AAC departing schools, I doubt it drops much at all.

Whatever the difference in the distribution reduction for this season and the 1.75 x 3 is what the additional “penalty” will come out to be.

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

Is the $3 million one year, or two years of conference revenue deferment ($1.5 million per year) ? I cannot remember

(09-23-2022 07:51 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 05:25 PM)inutech Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 05:15 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

That's a big chunk of their overall budget. Also. why would they not want the AAC6 to know how much they had to pay? Why would they care if we know?

I think it was the conference that didn't want the numbers to be known.

They didn't want rich programs like UNT hearing about how small the buy out ended up being and digging around in their couch cushions and also leaving early. If more than half of the AAC-6 also left last year, that'd have been a problem for the conference (although I assume a waiver would have been forthcoming, since we managed to have enough schools coming in for next season).

The AAC6 had no options for 2022-2023 other than C-USA. The Sunbelt Conference facilitated the early exits by the SBC3.

Right. And we think we know that was always going to be the case for the AAC. But things were changing pretty quickly and maybe they just wanted it quiet just in case.

I don't think it could possibly have made any difference in the end either way. The AAC-6 didn't need to know the exact amount to know that if the SB-3 could pay it, they could too. So even if this was the logic (and it's all I can think of) it wasn't really anything that could have mattered.

(09-22-2022 05:04 PM)WKUApollo Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:46 PM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 01:18 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 01:13 PM)hannibalDawg Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 12:26 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Surprised I havent seen this here given the discussion that we had throughout the whole ordeal, but what caught my eye was this...


https://sm2media.com/31214/news/usm-paid...xit-c-usa/

It was posted yesterday. Sent to the realignment thread

Sent from my SM-N986U1 using Tapatalk

Ah ok, no wonder I didnt see it.

Can somebody explain why it was moved? This is definitely relevant to every school that is currently in CUSA. I’d just like an explanation of what we can and can’t post here.

If you take a look at the one that was moved, you can see it was going off the rails quick and we have all had enough of that. This one hasn't, yet which is why it remains.

That’s fair. I was just wondering if it was the actual subject that was an issue.

(09-23-2022 08:23 AM)RustonBulldog Wrote:  

(09-23-2022 07:08 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

CUSA doesn't get revenue for the 3 this season because they're not in CUSA. So the 1.75 is to cover that and a penalty for leaving early.

Much like the AAC6, if USM, ODU, and UM would've stayed, then yes CUSA would've received money for them being in the conference and the revenue would've been withheld.

C-USA will still get its CFP money, media money and bowl distribution money (plus basketball credits). How much that drops, is still to be determined. The CFP money won’t drop much, if any. The bowl distribution will drop by potentially one bowl (but may not drop at all depending on bowl eligible teams). The media deal is the big question. The pizza size might shrink a little, but it still only being split 5 ways and with us still have the six AAC departing schools, I doubt it drops much at all.

Whatever the difference in the distribution reduction for this season and the 1.75 x 3 is what the additional “penalty” will come out to be.

It depends on the number of schools. So for this season CUSA won't get paid for USM, ODU, or Marshall. Sunbelt will.

I'll preference that with a "if I understand right". Three of us can read the same thing and have 3 different opinions.

CUSA won't get $4.2 million ($300k/team) for 14 teams but disperse to 11. There's not 14 teams there. They'll get $3.3 million and disperse to 5, holding the 6 leaving pay as exit fee.

(09-22-2022 12:26 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Surprised I havent seen this here given the discussion that we had throughout the whole ordeal, but what caught my eye was this...

Quote:The agreement required Marshall, Old Dominion and Southern Miss to refrain from disclosing the agreement with other universities. The documents specifically named Florida Atlantic, Charlotte, North Texas, UTSA and UAB as schools to not share the information with.

https://sm2media.com/31214/news/usm-paid...xit-c-usa/

Silly public record laws.

(09-23-2022 10:35 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(09-23-2022 08:23 AM)RustonBulldog Wrote:  

(09-23-2022 07:08 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

CUSA doesn't get revenue for the 3 this season because they're not in CUSA. So the 1.75 is to cover that and a penalty for leaving early.

Much like the AAC6, if USM, ODU, and UM would've stayed, then yes CUSA would've received money for them being in the conference and the revenue would've been withheld.

C-USA will still get its CFP money, media money and bowl distribution money (plus basketball credits). How much that drops, is still to be determined. The CFP money won’t drop much, if any. The bowl distribution will drop by potentially one bowl (but may not drop at all depending on bowl eligible teams). The media deal is the big question. The pizza size might shrink a little, but it still only being split 5 ways and with us still have the six AAC departing schools, I doubt it drops much at all.

Whatever the difference in the distribution reduction for this season and the 1.75 x 3 is what the additional “penalty” will come out to be.

It depends on the number of schools. So for this season CUSA won't get paid for USM, ODU, or Marshall. Sunbelt will.

I'll preference that with a "if I understand right". Three of us can read the same thing and have 3 different opinions.

CUSA won't get $4.2 million ($300k/team) for 14 teams but disperse to 11. There's not 14 teams there. They'll get $3.3 million and disperse to 5, holding the 6 leaving pay as exit fee.

The lawyers were the big winners.

(09-23-2022 08:32 AM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

Is the $3 million one year, or two years of conference revenue deferment ($1.5 million per year) ? I cannot remember

If memory serves avg payout has been 1.5-1.85 over the past three to four years with the ncaap and current media deal. The bulk of that payout is NCAA credits and ncaap monies which are a payout that is then dispersed to the member institutions. So the less teams the more money per. I saw where someone with USM was anticipating a 4-5MM shortfall between this year's budget 21-22 payout being waived and the 23-24 budget with no payout plus the 1.75MM is more than the current SBC payout when the SBC structure is split between 14 instead of 10. My understanding is this is why USM fought so hard to keep the tournament at the Pete. That was real money coming in vs money that would never hit their books. Long run I think USM will be fine as there will be cost savings for them.for travel especially in non revenue sports. El Paso in division iss a lot further than San Marcos in division for those sports. The issue they will have in the short is being strapped and unable to move on from coaches or go big if one is poached for the next several years coupled with the Favre stuff I don't envy their athletic dept for the next 3-5 years.

I use USM here because they and Tech are definitely peer institutions in most aspects, and the fact that Marshall and ODU have a healthier budget too absorb these shortfalls much easier. I enjoyed the past decade in the conference with all three and wish them well. I just think it.is a big risk in the short term especially if the payouts as are being hinted are almost a wash if not favoring the smaller conference before travel costs even then back out

(09-23-2022 01:05 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-23-2022 08:32 AM)KAjunRaider Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 04:56 PM)SICemDAWGS! Wrote:  

(09-22-2022 02:31 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Its going to be interesting to see how much the AAC6 will have to "pay" when they leave.

The $3MM in conference revenue deferment. USM, ODU, and Marshall had to forfeit those revenue plus pay an additional 1.75MM in penalties for leaving early.

Hopefully USM actually does save money on travel because that 4.75MM is basically 20% of their athletic budget. My understanding is a large portion of the amazing new media deal for the SBC was ESPN being kind enough to raise the evaluation of what the exposure is for them carrying the games. If it's anything like the leaks from the MAC deal (and how quiet the AD's and commissioner have been on the figures lead me to believe it is) then money will be the same or slightly higher changing hands, but the value for being on ESPN+ will have doubled in value to the universities according to the deal. Which allows ESPN to flex a deal worth $4MM per school, but only have to hand over $400k per because 3.6MM is tied up in broadcasting fees and exposure valuation.

Is the $3 million one year, or two years of conference revenue deferment ($1.5 million per year) ? I cannot remember

If memory serves avg payout has been 1.5-1.85 over the past three to four years with the ncaap and current media deal. The bulk of that payout is NCAA credits and ncaap monies which are a payout that is then dispersed to the member institutions. So the less teams the more money per. I saw where someone with USM was anticipating a 4-5MM shortfall between this year's budget 21-22 payout being waived and the 23-24 budget with no payout plus the 1.75MM is more than the current SBC payout when the SBC structure is split between 14 instead of 10. My understanding is this is why USM fought so hard to keep the tournament at the Pete. That was real money coming in vs money that would never hit their books. Long run I think USM will be fine as there will be cost savings for them.for travel especially in non revenue sports. El Paso in division iss a lot further than San Marcos in division for those sports. The issue they will have in the short is being strapped and unable to move on from coaches or go big if one is poached for the next several years coupled with the Favre stuff I don't envy their athletic dept for the next 3-5 years.

I use USM here because they and Tech are definitely peer institutions in most aspects, and the fact that Marshall and ODU have a healthier budget too absorb these shortfalls much easier. I enjoyed the past decade in the conference with all three and wish them well. I just think it.is a big risk in the short term especially if the payouts as are being hinted are almost a wash if not favoring the smaller conference before travel costs even then back out

The Mississippi paper said that Southern Miss shortfall will be 4.5 million for this year, paying the 1.75 million and Southern Miss will not get any Sunbelt revenue this year.

Both Marshall and ODU will be hurt by their shortfalls also. ODU is
just a bloated student fee budget that exists to pay for title IX sports.

WV is one of the poorest states in the country with a shrinking population.
Ironically the only two states to loss population besides Illinois was WV and Mississippi.

The conference exit fee is 3 million. Typically a school would forfeit 2 years of income from the conference which should total around 3 million. In this case the schools forfeit only the 2021-2022 year conference payouts (about 1.4 million) and pay 1.75 million up front for leaving early. A total of 3.15 million. So CUSA gets its extra 150,000 per school for them leaving early up front instead of waiting another year.

The schools will not get paid by the Sunbelt Conference for this year. In USM's case their AD announced 3 million increase in budget for this year (likely from money raised initially to write a 3 million dollar check to CUSA as USM had raised money before hand) and expect another 2 million increase within 2 years (mostly from expected sunbelt revenue). USM is also already expecting to save $800,000 in travel from this year alone being in the sunbelt.

(09-24-2022 09:52 PM)ElectroEagle Wrote:  The conference exit fee is 3 million. Typically a school would forfeit 2 years of income from the conference which should total around 3 million. In this case the schools forfeit only the 2021-2022 year conference payouts (about 1.4 million) and pay 1.75 million up front for leaving early. A total of 3.15 million. So CUSA gets its extra 150,000 per school for them leaving early up front instead of waiting another year.

The schools will not get paid by the Sunbelt Conference for this year. In USM's case their AD announced 3 million increase in budget for this year (likely from money raised initially to write a 3 million dollar check to CUSA as USM had raised money before hand) and expect another 2 million increase within 2 years (mostly from expected sunbelt revenue). USM is also already expecting to save $800,000 in travel from this year alone being in the sunbelt.

Let’s see some figures on this? I don’t believe that for a second

Texas State same distance as UTSA, Lafayette the same as La Tech, Ark State the same as UNT, Troy the same as UAB

Where are all these savings?