CSNbbs

Well, at least we (the AAC) made the graphic...can't say the same about the rest of the G5...

I figured it would look something like that but it's still depressing. Ideally, it would be more fair if each individual team could negotiate their own individual television contract regardless of conference affiliation based off of that particular team's idiosyncratic merit and appeal. Then the Wake Forests of the world couldn't siphon off the success of the FSUs of the world.

(10-15-2014 02:24 PM)Indiana Bones Wrote: [ -> ]I figured it would look something like that but it's still depressing. Ideally, it would be more fair if each individual team could negotiate their own individual television contract regardless of conference affiliation based off of that particular team's idiosyncratic merit and appeal. Then the Wake Forests of the world couldn't siphon off the success of the FSUs of the world.

ND agrees with you.

(10-15-2014 02:19 PM)HuskyU Wrote: [ -> ]Well, at least we (the AAC) made the graphic...can't say the same about the rest of the G5...

Probably because the American was a BCS conference when the data was graphed?

(10-15-2014 02:43 PM)MWC Tex Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-15-2014 02:19 PM)HuskyU Wrote: [ -> ]Well, at least we (the AAC) made the graphic...can't say the same about the rest of the G5...

Probably because the American was a BCS conference when the data was graphed?

Probably just because they love us more.

If it remains intact as is I imagine the AAC will bump to about a third of the Entitled 5's numbers.

When you adjust those numbers to show how much that is per school, the Big 12 is right there with the ACC and B1G. The PAC has the strongest deal, meaning they have little pressure to expand. And the SEC will be renegotiated very soon which will no doubt put them right up there with the rest of the P5.

The surprising thing (or maybe not) is that the P5 are all fairly close, and the gulf between them and the G5 is cosmic.

(10-15-2014 02:56 PM)FrancisDrake Wrote: [ -> ]If it remains intact as is I imagine the AAC will bump to about a third of the Entitled 5's numbers.

What would lead you to believe that?

(10-15-2014 02:56 PM)FrancisDrake Wrote: [ -> ]If it remains intact as is I imagine the AAC will bump to about a third of the Entitled 5's numbers.

That would mean a quadrupling of revenue, to around $8 million per school, per year. I see no basis for that whatsoever.

(10-15-2014 03:23 PM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]When you adjust those numbers to show how much that is per school, the Big 12 is right there with the ACC and B1G. The PAC has the strongest deal, meaning they have little pressure to expand. And the SEC will be renegotiated very soon which will no doubt put them right up there with the rest of the P5.

The surprising thing (or maybe not) is that the P5 are all fairly close, and the gulf between them and the G5 is cosmic.

Thats the main problem with that graphic. Is that the revenue per year? Its not clear. We need a graphic that compares revenue per year per school. Then it would make sense. I have no idea what this graphic is comparing exactly

(10-15-2014 02:56 PM)FrancisDrake Wrote: [ -> ]If it remains intact as is I imagine the AAC will bump to about a third of the Entitled 5's numbers.

Based on their stellar FB performance?

(10-15-2014 04:16 PM)goofus Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-15-2014 03:23 PM)ken d Wrote: [ -> ]When you adjust those numbers to show how much that is per school, the Big 12 is right there with the ACC and B1G. The PAC has the strongest deal, meaning they have little pressure to expand. And the SEC will be renegotiated very soon which will no doubt put them right up there with the rest of the P5.

The surprising thing (or maybe not) is that the P5 are all fairly close, and the gulf between them and the G5 is cosmic.

Thats the main problem with that graphic. Is that the revenue per year? Its not clear. We need a graphic that compares revenue per year per school. Then it would make sense. I have no idea what this graphic is comparing exactly

It looks like conference revenue per year on average through the length of the deal.

Again I go back to the al la carte regional packages to see where the B12 is going to have an issue.

B1G-MAC
SEC-CUSA
PAC-MWC
ACC-AAC

The B12 is in a region without a G5 dance partner. Yes Rice, Houston and Tulsa are in the B12's region but the AAC is more so ACC country.

Any graph like this that doesn't account for number of schools in the conference is so fundamentally flawed that I can't go any further.

(10-15-2014 04:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-15-2014 02:56 PM)FrancisDrake Wrote: [ -> ]If it remains intact as is I imagine the AAC will bump to about a third of the Entitled 5's numbers.

That would mean a quadrupling of revenue, to around $8 million per school, per year. I see no basis for that whatsoever.

See Southwest Conference. See WAC-16. See C-USA 2.0. This is a conference contract. The AAC might have some programs at the top that would command that kind of money, but no way are Tulsa, Tulane, SMU football and UConn football part of that high dollar club.

I doubt the AAC remains intact over the long haul.

(10-17-2014 04:49 PM)ESE84 Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-15-2014 04:04 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ]

(10-15-2014 02:56 PM)FrancisDrake Wrote: [ -> ]If it remains intact as is I imagine the AAC will bump to about a third of the Entitled 5's numbers.

That would mean a quadrupling of revenue, to around $8 million per school, per year. I see no basis for that whatsoever.

See Southwest Conference. See WAC-16. See C-USA 2.0. This is a conference contract. The AAC might have some programs at the top that would command that kind of money, but no way are Tulsa, Tulane, SMU football and UConn football part of that high dollar club.

I doubt the AAC remains intact over the long haul.

UCONN is tier one in the AAC contract and will continue to be regardless of the product on the football field.