Nevada, TV holding up schedule
By Ferd Lewis
POSTED: 01:30 a.m. HST, Mar 03, 2011
One thing is for certain, however, WAC officials say, the conference will have significantly fewer TV games. Associate commissioner Jeff Hurd said the contract called for a minimum of 10 games on ESPN or ESPN2, plus an additional four on ESPNU. But with Boise State's departure, ESPN has the right to redo the contract and Hurd said, "Without knowing the exact numbers yet,
our appearances are going to be reduced from the past and they are going to be reduced, I think, dramatically."
UH, Nevada and Fresno State are expected to get the bulk of the appearances the WAC does receive, but will not share in the money since schools leaving the conference forfeit revenue in their final year of membership.
Last year WAC schools received approximately $400,000 each from the ESPN contract, a figure that is expected to be cut by half or more with Boise State's departure.
http://www.staradvertiser.com/sports/spo...edule.html
What about all of the posters from UTSA and TXST who were so convinced there was going to be no cut in WAC tv dollars? Any thought of a "cut" was just the opinion of the uninformed according to them. Don't see any of them responding.
The interesting thing would be, what happens to the WAC schools if the SBC can snare $400k per team with its new tv contract...
(03-03-2011 05:18 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote: [ -> ]The interesting thing would be, what happens tot he WAC schools if the SBC can snare $400k per team with its new tv contract...
All I know is I don't want La-Tech crawling back. If we jump them then let them suffer. No reason to let them reap the benefits of our improvement when they've done NOTHING to help us. In fact, they've done more to hurt us.
(03-03-2011 04:33 PM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote: [ -> ]What about all of the posters from UTSA and TXST who were so convinced there was going to be no cut in WAC tv dollars? Any thought of a "cut" was just the opinion of the uninformed according to them. Don't see any of them responding.
-----------
The ONLY interest ESPN had in the WAC was Boise, Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii. Once they clear out the WAC will be either paying some network to carry a few games or else doing them for free.
(03-03-2011 07:03 PM)eager eagle Wrote: [ -> ] (03-03-2011 04:33 PM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote: [ -> ]What about all of the posters from UTSA and TXST who were so convinced there was going to be no cut in WAC tv dollars? Any thought of a "cut" was just the opinion of the uninformed according to them. Don't see any of them responding.
-----------
The ONLY interest ESPN had in the WAC was Boise, Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii. Once they clear out the WAC will be either paying some network to carry a few games or else doing them for free.
The fans of the two Texas schools were primarily the ones spouting the nonsense . . I cannot believe they are that naieve, but obviously they are!
They also hang their hat on the fact that they will play BYU and will, therefore, get a share of the money ESPN will pay BYU . . duh, that is not going to happen . . BYU will not share that pie with the WAC.
The majority of WAC TV games featured Boise at home or Boise on the road . . Boise was primarily the WAC TV contract.
(03-03-2011 07:15 PM)ManzanoWolf Wrote: [ -> ] (03-03-2011 07:03 PM)eager eagle Wrote: [ -> ] (03-03-2011 04:33 PM)VideoGreenEagle Wrote: [ -> ]What about all of the posters from UTSA and TXST who were so convinced there was going to be no cut in WAC tv dollars? Any thought of a "cut" was just the opinion of the uninformed according to them. Don't see any of them responding.
-----------
The ONLY interest ESPN had in the WAC was Boise, Fresno, Nevada, and Hawaii. Once they clear out the WAC will be either paying some network to carry a few games or else doing them for free.
The fans of the two Texas schools were primarily the ones spouting the nonsense . . I cannot believe they are that naieve, but obviously they are!
They also hang their hat on the fact that they will play BYU and will, therefore, get a share of the money ESPN will pay BYU . . duh, that is not going to happen . . BYU will not share that pie with the WAC.
The majority of WAC TV games featured Boise at home or Boise on the road . . Boise was primarily the WAC TV contract.
Yes they were.
(03-04-2011 12:23 PM)dchi72 Wrote: [ -> ]Yes they were.
Time to come home.
(03-04-2011 03:03 PM)FIUFan Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2011 12:23 PM)dchi72 Wrote: [ -> ]Yes they were.
Time to come home.
This isn't La-Tech's home anymore. Home is where the heart is and their heart will never be in the Sun Belt.
What happens if Tech stays in the watered down WAC, runs the table in that conference, ends up with a 7-5 record (with 6 wins coming within conference and the other win coming against a FCS team) and they get a bowl invite over a 7-5 SBC team?
(03-04-2011 03:32 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote: [ -> ]What happens if Tech stays in the watered down WAC, runs the table in that conference, ends up with a 7-5 record (with 6 wins coming within conference and the other win coming against a FCS team) and they get a bowl invite over a 7-5 SBC team?
The WAC will have less bowl tie-ins so this isn't as likely to happen as it would have in the past.
(03-04-2011 03:32 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote: [ -> ]What happens if Tech stays in the watered down WAC, runs the table in that conference, ends up with a 7-5 record (with 6 wins coming within conference and the other win coming against a FCS team) and they get a bowl invite over a 7-5 SBC team?
----------------
If its an at large bid (no tie in) the team closest to the bowl gets the nod. If it was the Independence bowl looking at Tech or Troy then Tech gets the call. It its the Mobile bowl then Troy would get the bid.
(03-04-2011 04:48 PM)eager eagle Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2011 03:32 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote: [ -> ]What happens if Tech stays in the watered down WAC, runs the table in that conference, ends up with a 7-5 record (with 6 wins coming within conference and the other win coming against a FCS team) and they get a bowl invite over a 7-5 SBC team?
----------------
If its an at large bid (no tie in) the team closest to the bowl gets the nod. If it was the Independence bowl looking at Tech or Troy then Tech gets the call. It its the Mobile bowl then Troy would get the bid.
Then explain how NIU got a Independence bowl bid over ULL and ASU! That still pisses me off. I hope La Tech rots in the WAC.
So the revenue cuts in half (at least) for 2011... with UH, UNR, and Fresno getting most of the air time. What happens in 2012 when those three schools are gone? Does it go all the way down to SBC/MAC level? From what I understand that is about $100K per team each season. The WAC was using that money to offset travel costs. I feel bad for a school like NMSU. Even SJSU, they seem to be good people. Idaho is a real pain in the rear to travel to but they were a good conference member as well. USU did not handle themselves well on the way out so I could care less about them.
If its an at large bid (no tie in) the team closest to the bowl gets the nod. If it was the Independence bowl looking at Tech or Troy then Tech gets the call. It its the Mobile bowl then Troy would get the bid.
[/quote]
Then explain how NIU got a Independence bowl bid over ULL and ASU! That still pisses me off. I hope La Tech rots in the WAC.
[/quote]-------------
I cant. My statement was based on what would be logical but the situation you mention blows it apart. As best I can remember it seems the decision was more or less dictated by ESPN who wanted to cover as much media market as possible, they could care less about how many folks attended the game. So, from a bowl perspective I think the closer team would be invited (all other factors equal) but tv folks are calling the shots and would determine the invite based on media market coveage. Markets drive the train, like it or not.
(03-04-2011 07:25 PM)stebo Wrote: [ -> ]So the revenue cuts in half (at least) for 2011... with UH, UNR, and Fresno getting most of the air time. What happens in 2012 when those three schools are gone? Does it go all the way down to SBC/MAC level? From what I understand that is about $100K per team each season. The WAC was using that money to offset travel costs. I feel bad for a school like NMSU. Even SJSU, they seem to be good people. Idaho is a real pain in the rear to travel to but they were a good conference member as well. USU did not handle themselves well on the way out so I could care less about them.
I think this post from the WAC Board hits the nail on the head; ESPN has shown no interest in the WAC schools left behind:
The thing is, the WAC TV deal will be cut in half after BSU leaves...how much is it going to be cut after UH, Nevada and Fresno State leaves? Note that ESPN is already stating that they are pretty much going to pick games that involve UH/Nevada/Fresno...ESPN isn't saying that they want to pick *any* of the WAC teams being left behind. That is *not* an encouraging sign for the WAC's TV deal starting in 2012.
I would not want to be flying my olympic sport teams out West knowing the conference revenue is dropping like a rock.
(03-04-2011 10:04 PM)ManzanoWolf Wrote: [ -> ]I think this post from the WAC Board hits the nail on the head; ESPN has shown no interest in the WAC schools left behind:
The thing is, the WAC TV deal will be cut in half after BSU leaves...how much is it going to be cut after UH, Nevada and Fresno State leaves? Note that ESPN is already stating that they are pretty much going to pick games that involve UH/Nevada/Fresno...ESPN isn't saying that they want to pick *any* of the WAC teams being left behind. That is *not* an encouraging sign for the WAC's TV deal starting in 2012.
I would not want to be flying my olympic sport teams out West knowing the conference revenue is dropping like a rock.
Rock? Try meteor!
(03-04-2011 04:48 PM)eager eagle Wrote: [ -> ] (03-04-2011 03:32 PM)bluephi1914 Wrote: [ -> ]What happens if Tech stays in the watered down WAC, runs the table in that conference, ends up with a 7-5 record (with 6 wins coming within conference and the other win coming against a FCS team) and they get a bowl invite over a 7-5 SBC team?
----------------
If its an at large bid (no tie in) the team closest to the bowl gets the nod. If it was the Independence bowl looking at Tech or Troy then Tech gets the call. It its the Mobile bowl then Troy would get the bid.
Clearly your knowledge of the bowl situation is astounding as you didn't even realize that Mobile is a Sun Belt bowl...
(03-04-2011 07:42 PM)eager eagle Wrote: [ -> ]If its an at large bid (no tie in) the team closest to the bowl gets the nod. If it was the Independence bowl looking at Tech or Troy then Tech gets the call. It its the Mobile bowl then Troy would get the bid.
Then explain how NIU got a Independence bowl bid over ULL and ASU! That still pisses me off. I hope La Tech rots in the WAC.
[/quote]-------------
I cant. My statement was based on what would be logical but the situation you mention blows it apart. As best I can remember it seems the decision was more or less dictated by ESPN who wanted to cover as much media market as possible, they could care less about how many folks attended the game. So, from a bowl perspective I think the closer team would be invited (all other factors equal) but tv folks are calling the shots and would determine the invite based on media market coveage. Markets drive the train, like it or not.
[/quote]
TV had nothing to do with it. I know for a fact that LA Tech said they wouldn't play in the bowl if a Belt team were to get an invite. That is why NIU ended up in the bowl.