(05-27-2014 06:11 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 06:42 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 06:02 PM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 10:40 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 10:25 AM)ark30inf Wrote:  A geographic realignment is a different beast than one to try musical chairs again to get a few more tv bucks.

But even a geographic realignment has to have a whole lot of agreement from a whole lot of schools and is itself problematic.

No doubt a lot of ego's would have to be set aside. LaTech and Marshall being the primary ones.

It isn't personal, it's business. You want CUSA members to see things from an SBC prospective, which just won't happen. You want a geographic realignment because you live with the fear that UL-L,TX St, GA St, or AState will be invited to join CUSA and you're smart enough to know that that would be disastrous for the SBC. I don't blame an App St fan for feeling this way. I would too. Right now, CUSA has no presence in Arkansas or Georgia, so AState and GA St have that going for them, but any of the four mentioned SBC members would fit nicely into CUSA's footprint.

After following this stuff for 30+ years I completely understand no decision in collegiate athletics is personal. It's always completely selfish.

To be clear, I have no fear of any of the schools you mentioned leaving for CUSA. The only way they expand is if an outside influence, say the Big XII, makes a move on a AAC school and the resulting domino effect makes it way down to CUSA. Anyone in their right mind understands the SunBelt will be, probably already is (the exception of Idaho), a superior football conference to the new CUSA. Basketball is another issue, but this discussion is about realignment and we all know football drives that bus at the G5 level.

The P5 playoff payout to G5 schools is modeled around a 12 member conference. Additional members only decrease the individual school payouts and no CUSA president is going to vote themselves a reduction in revenue. Especially after their new conference TV deal is announced. CUSA was poised to raid the SunBelt of two more schools, but that was stopped dead in its tracks when the playoff revenue plan was announced.

I think you better resign yourself to the idea that regional schools are the future for the SunBelt and CUSA. My contacts in the broadcast media hierarchy say it is only a matter of time until the dollars dry up. Aligning regionally will be the only way our schools survive in their present form. Unless you think going back to FCS is a better option.

I agree that regional GO5 conferences make sense, but I also understand that there will be overlap amongst those regions. Many people (like me), think it makes more sense for Rice and Houston to play in different conferences than it does for them to share the same conference. The same thing can be said about UTSA and TX St., UTEP and NMSU, or La Tech and ULM. We can play each other if we want to, but we can all still retain a degree of separation that helps to define our differences. The point I was making is that La Tech does not want to be in the same conference as ULM. That is in no way a knock against ULM or the SBC. It is a simple business decision. You're reference to La Tech's ego being a problem was not correct. That's all I was saying.

Certainly you jest. LaTech's ego is a huge problem. And, mostly for itself.

(05-29-2014 02:21 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 12:05 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 10:17 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 06:51 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  One thing that you have to credit the Sunbelt with is that the Conference has learned to make do without a lot of tv money. The article mentions the possibility that tv contracts for some of the G5 conferences might be lower this time around. You have to scroll down one or two to get to the story.
http://g5conferencenews.blogspot.com/

It's been my opinion for some time now CUSA's new line up will result in far less TV dollars when their next TV contract is rolled out. The SunBelt's TV money will likely stay about the same. While I agree there will likely be some realignment among CUSA and the SunBelt I think it will be more of a re-shuffling of the deck among to create more regional conferences. I do not see a conference featuring the "so called best of the three" being created just to compete with the AAC & MWC.

It is wishful thinking on my part, but it would make sense to see exit fees waived in order to settle this thing once and for all.

Actually the CUSA contract when renewed is expected to be the same of more. TV contracts (except for the P5) are based not upon the teams' performance, but the number of cable boxes in a market. That is because a cable provider pays a network a fee per box, not based upon ratings. If you have been reading about the dispute between CableOne and Viacom or Direct TV and Turner etc.... you will see that. That is why the AAC replaced the departing members with the Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Orlando and Memphis markets. Had they not done so, then they would have lost even more ground. And it's why CUSA replaced their lost markets with Miami-Fort Lauderdale, San Antonio, Nashville, Norfolk/Tidewater, Charlotte and kept Dallas.

Ask anyone in the media business about that and they will confirm it. The SBC's problem is that except for Atlanta, they don't have any really big markets.

I didn't say that I like the way it is done. That 's just the way it is done.

TV execs do not have to follow this model. Just ask the AAC if the system you just wrote about matters anymore. Even if the networks pay per population, the money outlay can be lowered to a ridiculous amount of money. In the end, a Conference will get what the market says its worth, just like it does in buying a house. There is nothing from stopping the Networks from paying Conf USA less than what their contract is right now.

Actually, they do follow that model for all except the P5. That is why the AAC (since they were not a P5 member) got what they did. It was purely based on market. They may have received a small premium for Basketball because of UCONN, Cinncinatti and Temple. The rest was based NOT on performance but solely on market. If you don't believe it, just aske anyone in that industry and they will be glad to tell you that it is true. The P5 get paid so much because they are deemed to have a National Market not limited to the sites within their conference.

Funny but the people I know in the ad industry if you ask them about ad rates based on TV market they laugh and say "we've invented computers since then."

They pay for audience reached not potentially reached.

(05-29-2014 05:15 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 02:21 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 12:05 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 10:17 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 06:51 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  One thing that you have to credit the Sunbelt with is that the Conference has learned to make do without a lot of tv money. The article mentions the possibility that tv contracts for some of the G5 conferences might be lower this time around. You have to scroll down one or two to get to the story.
http://g5conferencenews.blogspot.com/

It's been my opinion for some time now CUSA's new line up will result in far less TV dollars when their next TV contract is rolled out. The SunBelt's TV money will likely stay about the same. While I agree there will likely be some realignment among CUSA and the SunBelt I think it will be more of a re-shuffling of the deck among to create more regional conferences. I do not see a conference featuring the "so called best of the three" being created just to compete with the AAC & MWC.

It is wishful thinking on my part, but it would make sense to see exit fees waived in order to settle this thing once and for all.

Actually the CUSA contract when renewed is expected to be the same of more. TV contracts (except for the P5) are based not upon the teams' performance, but the number of cable boxes in a market. That is because a cable provider pays a network a fee per box, not based upon ratings. If you have been reading about the dispute between CableOne and Viacom or Direct TV and Turner etc.... you will see that. That is why the AAC replaced the departing members with the Dallas, Houston, New Orleans, Orlando and Memphis markets. Had they not done so, then they would have lost even more ground. And it's why CUSA replaced their lost markets with Miami-Fort Lauderdale, San Antonio, Nashville, Norfolk/Tidewater, Charlotte and kept Dallas.

Ask anyone in the media business about that and they will confirm it. The SBC's problem is that except for Atlanta, they don't have any really big markets.

I didn't say that I like the way it is done. That 's just the way it is done.

TV execs do not have to follow this model. Just ask the AAC if the system you just wrote about matters anymore. Even if the networks pay per population, the money outlay can be lowered to a ridiculous amount of money. In the end, a Conference will get what the market says its worth, just like it does in buying a house. There is nothing from stopping the Networks from paying Conf USA less than what their contract is right now.

Actually, they do follow that model for all except the P5. That is why the AAC (since they were not a P5 member) got what they did. It was purely based on market. They may have received a small premium for Basketball because of UCONN, Cinncinatti and Temple. The rest was based NOT on performance but solely on market. If you don't believe it, just aske anyone in that industry and they will be glad to tell you that it is true. The P5 get paid so much because they are deemed to have a National Market not limited to the sites within their conference.

If Fox or CBS want to pay half of what they are paying for Conf USA in the new tv contract they will. They are not bound to any formula. It's free market, not formula based. Why do you think NBC low balled the AAC so badly, because they could. ESPN came in at the last minute and matched NBCs offer.

1. tight regional conferences will pretty much always suck if you are not one of the top conferences loaded with the big boys and even then those conferences are not that "tight"

the SEC is 8 states with 1 team and 3 with two and almost all of those states have other D1-A programs and several of them (South Carolina, Florida, Texas and Georgia) have one or more major D1-A programs to choose from

2. the big 10 is pretty much the same they will have 8 states with 1 team and 3 with 2 teams and most of those states have other D1-A programs available

the Big 12 and the PAC 12 are the conferences that each have 4 teams in one state and when you look at that model there are always programs of those 4 that are down and usually two of them........when Cal was good UCLA was bad and Stanford was not that good......Cal is terrible now, USC is not what USC expects to be and UCLA and Stanford are doing well

in the Big 12 Texas and Texas Tech were doing well and A&M was doing poorly (flat sucked based on what they SHOULD have been doing) and Baylor was terrible

A&M took their ball and ran away, Tech took a hit, UT is terrible by UT Standards and Baylor is doing well (great by Baylor Standards) and TCU is taking a hit, but they have some issues with booting a ton of players right in the middle of making the transition.......Baylor will probably be able to stay decent to good and one of those other teams will probably move back up

plus you have both Oklahoma and OkState that are doing very well and that is usually not the case and that is like almost two more Texas teams

CUSA had pretty much the same issue as well and will continue to do so.......UH was up and down, SMU was terrible for a long time, Rice was terrible and UTEP did OK and then went down........now Rice is up, UTSA is doing very well for a new program and north Texas state managed to have one of their two winning years in the decade already........shortly it will be one of them down and two doing well

3. "markets" mean nothing when you have teams that suck and do not delver the market period the end

4. if you are relying on other teams fans to show up to fill your stands your program sucks period the end and you have no "market" and if you go "regional" you will lose fans as your fans get tired of being one of the 2 out of 4+ programs that sucks in the conference ad they get tired of hearing BS at work about taking another beat down that season (and the last 5 seasons) and nationally no one cares about watching 4+ teams in the same state or "region" that suck all losing to each other and ending the season sucking

5. conferences that are not one of the major conferences need to do anything and everything to maximize wins of any type and to get the most programs in the conference winning and going to bowls

for the Sunbelt this means sending cease and desist letters to 100% of the EKUs MStates, westeran east coastal midcentral Floridas, TuckieStates, BammerNorthWesterns, Jaxborough States and letting them know they will NEVER be a part of the Sunbelt evAR and to stop mentioning the Sunbelt ever again and if the Sunbelt had been smart they would have 2 or more fewer members right now

they should probably threaten to remove members that have too many (one is too many) on message board forums that repeatedly mention the most asinine teams for "possible sunbelt membership" or that fret over "how will we get to 14"........here is an idea 5 of you take a hike and add 9 more members from D1-AA and then we cal all never hear from you again is you fall to "no one cares" status and those that are left will schedule more games with OOC teams and attempt to win them and draw OUR OWN FANS based on wins instead of having 18 schools within 3 miles all bringing 5 fans to go with out 1200 fans to make a big empty stajium of SUCK that is not on TV even for highlights on bleacherreports highlights reports

6. if you are that worried about TV then STEP UP and make the programs in the conference step up and demand they all toss 10 million per year into a pot for 3 years (330 million with 11 teams) and start a network and then figure out how to get that network on cable and possibly try and get it on over the air TV as well on one of the ghetto over the air channels even if you have to BUY time and then sel2l the adds yourself.....and if you have to buy time and sell the adds yourself them make the schools that are in those games responsible for selling some of those add minutes in return for a larger cut of the revenues and make them work their alumni and business networks to sell that add time........possibly even try and skirt IRS stupidity by making it a "donation" or a partial donation in exchange for some of that add time so it is tax deductible

7. REGIONAL will never work, but what would work is cherry picking programs from ACROSS THE USA and the having pods probably 18 or even 21 teams with 6 or 7 per pod and then LIMIT conference games to 8 total (7 would possibly even work better) and play 4 or 5 OOC games and spread out the availability of programming over the entire day

when you have 14 teams all on the east coast you are having the most reams in the part of the country that already has multiple other major conferences getting air time and then you have your own 14 teams all trying to get their air time as well.......that is just STUPID PERIOD

you want 4 teams or so trying to get airtime and of course once conference games start those teams will probably be playing each other or other conference games so that lessens the competition for air time and then as you move west you lessen the number of teams and conferences that you compete with for air time

BUT since you are all in the same conference and what happens in those conference games matters to other conference members and their fans you pick up those viewers......when you are 8 Texas Teams and 4 Louisiana Teams and two teams no one cares about well Texas and Louisiana (and the least number of viewers from those states with MAJOR programs already playing and drawing fans and causal viewers) and two nowhere teams are pretty much the MAX of anyone that cares what happens in the regional WeAreTurrible Conference (WATB) also known as the Sir Charles Conference (SCC)

when you have 6 programs in 5 or 6 states in one time zone, 6-7 programs in two time zones and 3-4 states and the rest in two other time zones and multiple states then you have a larger amount of interest spread all over the USA and throughout the day

Marshall
WKY
MTSU
which ever GSU is relevant but not both
FAU
FIU
USM

LaTech
Louisiana
stAte
Rice
UTSA
TxState
NMSU

Idaho
Wyoming
CSU
Fresno
SDSU
UNLV
Utah State

6 division games and 1 each from the others rotating.........with 21 teams you each kick in 5 million per year for 3 years to get a network up and running or to buy time on existing over the air channels or both, try and get as much carriage as possible (getting on over the air gains cable carriage since cable MSOs have to carry over the air channels and start working to sell add time of needed

(05-29-2014 07:29 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. tight regional conferences will pretty much always suck if you are not one of the top conferences loaded with the big boys and even then those conferences are not that "tight"

the SEC is 8 states with 1 team and 3 with two and almost all of those states have other D1-A programs and several of them (South Carolina, Florida, Texas and Georgia) have one or more major D1-A programs to choose from

2. the big 10 is pretty much the same they will have 8 states with 1 team and 3 with 2 teams and most of those states have other D1-A programs available

the Big 12 and the PAC 12 are the conferences that each have 4 teams in one state and when you look at that model there are always programs of those 4 that are down and usually two of them........when Cal was good UCLA was bad and Stanford was not that good......Cal is terrible now, USC is not what USC expects to be and UCLA and Stanford are doing well

in the Big 12 Texas and Texas Tech were doing well and A&M was doing poorly (flat sucked based on what they SHOULD have been doing) and Baylor was terrible

A&M took their ball and ran away, Tech took a hit, UT is terrible by UT Standards and Baylor is doing well (great by Baylor Standards) and TCU is taking a hit, but they have some issues with booting a ton of players right in the middle of making the transition.......Baylor will probably be able to stay decent to good and one of those other teams will probably move back up

plus you have both Oklahoma and OkState that are doing very well and that is usually not the case and that is like almost two more Texas teams

CUSA had pretty much the same issue as well and will continue to do so.......UH was up and down, SMU was terrible for a long time, Rice was terrible and UTEP did OK and then went down........now Rice is up, UTSA is doing very well for a new program and north Texas state managed to have one of their two winning years in the decade already........shortly it will be one of them down and two doing well

3. "markets" mean nothing when you have teams that suck and do not delver the market period the end

4. if you are relying on other teams fans to show up to fill your stands your program sucks period the end and you have no "market" and if you go "regional" you will lose fans as your fans get tired of being one of the 2 out of 4+ programs that sucks in the conference ad they get tired of hearing BS at work about taking another beat down that season (and the last 5 seasons) and nationally no one cares about watching 4+ teams in the same state or "region" that suck all losing to each other and ending the season sucking

5. conferences that are not one of the major conferences need to do anything and everything to maximize wins of any type and to get the most programs in the conference winning and going to bowls

for the Sunbelt this means sending cease and desist letters to 100% of the EKUs MStates, westeran east coastal midcentral Floridas, TuckieStates, BammerNorthWesterns, Jaxborough States and letting them know they will NEVER be a part of the Sunbelt evAR and to stop mentioning the Sunbelt ever again and if the Sunbelt had been smart they would have 2 or more fewer members right now

they should probably threaten to remove members that have too many (one is too many) on message board forums that repeatedly mention the most asinine teams for "possible sunbelt membership" or that fret over "how will we get to 14"........here is an idea 5 of you take a hike and add 9 more members from D1-AA and then we cal all never hear from you again is you fall to "no one cares" status and those that are left will schedule more games with OOC teams and attempt to win them and draw OUR OWN FANS based on wins instead of having 18 schools within 3 miles all bringing 5 fans to go with out 1200 fans to make a big empty stajium of SUCK that is not on TV even for highlights on bleacherreports highlights reports

6. if you are that worried about TV then STEP UP and make the programs in the conference step up and demand they all toss 10 million per year into a pot for 3 years (330 million with 11 teams) and start a network and then figure out how to get that network on cable and possibly try and get it on over the air TV as well on one of the ghetto over the air channels even if you have to BUY time and then sel2l the adds yourself.....and if you have to buy time and sell the adds yourself them make the schools that are in those games responsible for selling some of those add minutes in return for a larger cut of the revenues and make them work their alumni and business networks to sell that add time........possibly even try and skirt IRS stupidity by making it a "donation" or a partial donation in exchange for some of that add time so it is tax deductible

7. REGIONAL will never work, but what would work is cherry picking programs from ACROSS THE USA and the having pods probably 18 or even 21 teams with 6 or 7 per pod and then LIMIT conference games to 8 total (7 would possibly even work better) and play 4 or 5 OOC games and spread out the availability of programming over the entire day

when you have 14 teams all on the east coast you are having the most reams in the part of the country that already has multiple other major conferences getting air time and then you have your own 14 teams all trying to get their air time as well.......that is just STUPID PERIOD

you want 4 teams or so trying to get airtime and of course once conference games start those teams will probably be playing each other or other conference games so that lessens the competition for air time and then as you move west you lessen the number of teams and conferences that you compete with for air time

BUT since you are all in the same conference and what happens in those conference games matters to other conference members and their fans you pick up those viewers......when you are 8 Texas Teams and 4 Louisiana Teams and two teams no one cares about well Texas and Louisiana (and the least number of viewers from those states with MAJOR programs already playing and drawing fans and causal viewers) and two nowhere teams are pretty much the MAX of anyone that cares what happens in the regional WeAreTurrible Conference (WATB) also known as the Sir Charles Conference (SCC)

when you have 6 programs in 5 or 6 states in one time zone, 6-7 programs in two time zones and 3-4 states and the rest in two other time zones and multiple states then you have a larger amount of interest spread all over the USA and throughout the day

Marshall
WKY
MTSU
which ever GSU is relevant but not both
FAU
FIU
USM

LaTech
Louisiana
stAte
Rice
UTSA
TxState
NMSU

Idaho
Wyoming
CSU
Fresno
SDSU
UNLV
Utah State

6 division games and 1 each from the others rotating.........with 21 teams you each kick in 5 million per year for 3 years to get a network up and running or to buy time on existing over the air channels or both, try and get as much carriage as possible (getting on over the air gains cable carriage since cable MSOs have to carry over the air channels and start working to sell add time of needed

You put a lot of thought in this hillarious read.

(05-29-2014 07:29 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. tight regional conferences will pretty much always suck if you are not one of the top conferences loaded with the big boys and even then those conferences are not that "tight".................

Wow, there is a lot there in that stream of consciousness. But there is some good stuff in it.

I've always thought that your best bet is modeling after what is most successful...which is the SEC. One school from each state except in deep recruiting grounds/large states or where there is a natural rivalry.

I've also thought that you put together your own network and offer it up as a loss leader. Basically ultra-cheap content for any cable or satellite provider. Is it better to have a $1 million or less per school or be on every cable system in the country? You can charge more later if you deserve it.

But I don't much about the ins and outs of that business.

(05-29-2014 08:08 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(05-29-2014 07:29 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. tight regional conferences will pretty much always suck if you are not one of the top conferences loaded with the big boys and even then those conferences are not that "tight".................

Wow, there is a lot there in that stream of consciousness. But there is some good stuff in it.

I've always thought that your best bet is modeling after what is most successful...which is the SEC. One school from each state except in deep recruiting grounds/large states or where there is a natural rivalry.

I've also thought that you put together your own network and offer it up as a loss leader. Basically ultra-cheap content for any cable or satellite provider. Is it better to have a $1 million or less per school or be on every cable system in the country? You can charge more later if you deserve it.

But I don't much about the ins and outs of that business.

you have to remember with the SEC even in several of the states with natural rivalries the SEC has purposely avoided having two teams in the SEC, but that does not mean that the teams in those states avoid playing each other and usually it makes the game that much MORE meaningful

Georgia Georgia Tech

SC Clemson

Florida Florida State Miami

A&M would love to get Texas back on the schedule

and in the past A&M and LSU had a major rivalry when they were in different conferences

Texas OU was started well before they were in the same conference

Arkansas had a major rivalry (not yearly, but intense) with Ole' Miss for a long time before both were in the SEC and they stopped it a number of times because of how out of control the fans got

these games draw the major viewers of the state AND they have conference importance which draws in casual conference viewers and one of the main reasons for that is each team has a chance to be very good going into that game and each team winning that game has a chance to bring major strength back to the conference on general

7 teams in one state in the same conference brings NONE of that......4 teams in one state in the same conference starts to diminish that

and even to a degree teams that hate each other can root for that team to be good coming into that game.....is it funner for Florida or FSU to play a team that is 3-7 coming into that game and stomp them or is it even better to have them both undefeated and heading for a MNC or a BCS game and the one reaches out and rips that away from them and pretty much assures themselves of getting that MNC or BCs opportunity that they just took from the other.....I would argue it means more to crush big dreams than stomp further on already crushed dreams

also here is an example of the opposite

when TCU was the only MWC team in Texas and they were going for a BCS game I can assure you that Texas Tech, Baylor, SMU, north Texas State and UH fans were hoping week in and week out that TCU would get crushed and have those hoped ripped from them (Rice fans were studying and did not know the games were on)

I can assure you that had any of the above teams been in the MWC with TCU their fans for the most part would have hoped to see TCU get crushed and not make a BCS game and it would have been ever more prevalent the more Texas teams in the conference with them because it would have hurt those fans feelings and they viewed it as TCU doing something they were going to have to hear about for years and years at work

while with just TCU in the MWC from Texas sure every MWC fan (especially of good teams those years) wanted their team to beat TCU, but as those teams went down to TCU it was much easier for their fans to cheer for TCU even against other conference teams because it was meaningful for the conference in prestige and dollars and sure there were fans that still wanted them to lose even just because "if it is not us then screw everyone else", but in general I think you will find those are fans of programs that suck and it will nevAR be their team because their team and FANS suck and are only ever concerned with themselves and only care when their team is good (which is pretty much never)

hell there are Texas Tech fans that HATE TCU and Baylor even more now than ever because both of those teams have been to the BCS and there were thousands and thousands of Texas Tech fans (tens of thousands) that thought it was just great that Baylor was beaten by UCF and they cared nothing of what it meant to the Big 12 and they were glad when Texas was beaten by Oregon soundly........but of course they fail to recognize that no one has ever seen Texas Tech as leading the Big 12 in anything because they have never lead the big 12 in anything which is why they were an also ran in conference realignment......and of course they are not smart enough to figure out that the big 12 is most stable when the teams that win the conference beat other teams in BCS games and when the teams that are seen as the top teams in the conference (even in down years) beat other teams in bowl games

but with 4 Texas teams in the conference the competition is just too thick for some fans of some teams to take and the actively cheer for those teams to fail even if it means the conference itself looks incredibly weak (and then they openly wonder why no one looks at their team that has never won the conference or sniffed a BCS game as a skirt tail hanger on er)

(05-29-2014 07:29 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  1. tight regional conferences will pretty much always suck if you are not one of the top conferences loaded with the big boys and even then those conferences are not that "tight"

the SEC is 8 states with 1 team and 3 with two and almost all of those states have other D1-A programs and several of them (South Carolina, Florida, Texas and Georgia) have one or more major D1-A programs to choose from

Interesting yet irrelevant information. The 8th best team in the SEC has greater national interest than the #1 team in any G5 league.

They are playing a different game. What the SEC does and what the G5 CAN do are not the same thing and require different skill sets. You don't race drag bikes on a motorcross course.

Quote:2. the big 10 is pretty much the same they will have 8 states with 1 team and 3 with 2 teams and most of those states have other D1-A programs available

the Big 12 and the PAC 12 are the conferences that each have 4 teams in one state and when you look at that model there are always programs of those 4 that are down and usually two of them........when Cal was good UCLA was bad and Stanford was not that good......Cal is terrible now, USC is not what USC expects to be and UCLA and Stanford are doing well

in the Big 12 Texas and Texas Tech were doing well and A&M was doing poorly (flat sucked based on what they SHOULD have been doing) and Baylor was terrible

A&M took their ball and ran away, Tech took a hit, UT is terrible by UT Standards and Baylor is doing well (great by Baylor Standards) and TCU is taking a hit, but they have some issues with booting a ton of players right in the middle of making the transition.......Baylor will probably be able to stay decent to good and one of those other teams will probably move back up

plus you have both Oklahoma and OkState that are doing very well and that is usually not the case and that is like almost two more Texas teams

CUSA had pretty much the same issue as well and will continue to do so.......UH was up and down, SMU was terrible for a long time, Rice was terrible and UTEP did OK and then went down........now Rice is up, UTSA is doing very well for a new program and north Texas state managed to have one of their two winning years in the decade already........shortly it will be one of them down and two doing well

Got lost here. Not sure what the point was.

Quote:3. "markets" mean nothing when you have teams that suck and do not delver the market period the end

Markets don't mean a whole lot when you don't suck. None of the P5 have made purely market oriented moves but markets have a vastly different meaning to B1G, SEC, and P12 than it does to BigXII and ACC because those three are doing their own networks (notably only B1G and P12 have pure equity stakes) but their "market" interest is based on their capacity to charge higher carriage fees for their networks which is with one exception, state based rather than TV market based. The exception being Rutgers and NYC where BTN has successfully used Rutgers popularity to charge a carriage fee in NYC that is equal to the in-state amount rather than the out-of-state amount.

Quote:4. if you are relying on other teams fans to show up to fill your stands your program sucks period the end and you have no "market" and if you go "regional" you will lose fans as your fans get tired of being one of the 2 out of 4+ programs that sucks in the conference ad they get tired of hearing BS at work about taking another beat down that season (and the last 5 seasons) and nationally no one cares about watching 4+ teams in the same state or "region" that suck all losing to each other and ending the season sucking

Yet this is EXACTLY the thinking behind MWC splitting from WAC16. They wanted to cut fan friendly TV deals that had few weeknight games and wanted to bring back traditional regional games. At the end of this post, maps of WAC16 vs. MWC8. They not only increased their per team payout but got into a more ticket friendly alignment.

Quote:5. conferences that are not one of the major conferences need to do anything and everything to maximize wins of any type and to get the most programs in the conference winning and going to bowls

for the Sunbelt this means sending cease and desist letters to 100% of the EKUs MStates, westeran east coastal midcentral Floridas, TuckieStates, BammerNorthWesterns, Jaxborough States and letting them know they will NEVER be a part of the Sunbelt evAR and to stop mentioning the Sunbelt ever again and if the Sunbelt had been smart they would have 2 or more fewer members right now

they should probably threaten to remove members that have too many (one is too many) on message board forums that repeatedly mention the most asinine teams for "possible sunbelt membership" or that fret over "how will we get to 14"........here is an idea 5 of you take a hike and add 9 more members from D1-AA and then we cal all never hear from you again is you fall to "no one cares" status and those that are left will schedule more games with OOC teams and attempt to win them and draw OUR OWN FANS based on wins instead of having 18 schools within 3 miles all bringing 5 fans to go with out 1200 fans to make a big empty stajium of SUCK that is not on TV even for highlights on bleacherreports highlights reports

6. if you are that worried about TV then STEP UP and make the programs in the conference step up and demand they all toss 10 million per year into a pot for 3 years (330 million with 11 teams) and start a network and then figure out how to get that network on cable and possibly try and get it on over the air TV as well on one of the ghetto over the air channels even if you have to BUY time and then sel2l the adds yourself.....and if you have to buy time and sell the adds yourself them make the schools that are in those games responsible for selling some of those add minutes in return for a larger cut of the revenues and make them work their alumni and business networks to sell that add time........possibly even try and skirt IRS stupidity by making it a "donation" or a partial donation in exchange for some of that add time so it is tax deductible

We don't have any members who can toss $10 million into a pot. At best, we can retain some or all of the CFP money for the TV purpose but the reality is unless you have critical mass within a region, you aren't getting diddly for a cable network, and OTA TV isn't going to play along, Little Rock TV doesn't want to show a lot of App vs. GaSt or USA vs. GaSo. They want regional games, AState the preference followed by neighboring states.

Quote:7. REGIONAL will never work, but what would work is cherry picking programs from ACROSS THE USA and the having pods probably 18 or even 21 teams with 6 or 7 per pod and then LIMIT conference games to 8 total (7 would possibly even work better) and play 4 or 5 OOC games and spread out the availability of programming over the entire day

when you have 14 teams all on the east coast you are having the most reams in the part of the country that already has multiple other major conferences getting air time and then you have your own 14 teams all trying to get their air time as well.......that is just STUPID PERIOD

you want 4 teams or so trying to get airtime and of course once conference games start those teams will probably be playing each other or other conference games so that lessens the competition for air time and then as you move west you lessen the number of teams and conferences that you compete with for air time

BUT since you are all in the same conference and what happens in those conference games matters to other conference members and their fans you pick up those viewers......when you are 8 Texas Teams and 4 Louisiana Teams and two teams no one cares about well Texas and Louisiana (and the least number of viewers from those states with MAJOR programs already playing and drawing fans and causal viewers) and two nowhere teams are pretty much the MAX of anyone that cares what happens in the regional WeAreTurrible Conference (WATB) also known as the Sir Charles Conference (SCC)

when you have 6 programs in 5 or 6 states in one time zone, 6-7 programs in two time zones and 3-4 states and the rest in two other time zones and multiple states then you have a larger amount of interest spread all over the USA and throughout the day

Marshall
WKY
MTSU
which ever GSU is relevant but not both
FAU
FIU
USM

LaTech
Louisiana
stAte
Rice
UTSA
TxState
NMSU

Idaho
Wyoming
CSU
Fresno
SDSU
UNLV
Utah State

6 division games and 1 each from the others rotating.........with 21 teams you each kick in 5 million per year for 3 years to get a network up and running or to buy time on existing over the air channels or both, try and get as much carriage as possible (getting on over the air gains cable carriage since cable MSOs have to carry over the air channels and start working to sell add time of needed

Basically you are arguing get really big so you can play regional.

(05-29-2014 05:57 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny but the people I know in the ad industry if you ask them about ad rates based on TV market they laugh and say "we've invented computers since then."

They pay for audience reached not potentially reached.

Great point. If I shop for a lawnmower on the internet I will get ads on every site for lawnmowers for months but people still believe the big money behind TV wants to just cast wide nets without knowing if there are any fish in the sea.

(05-29-2014 08:43 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  also here is an example of the opposite

when TCU was the only MWC team in Texas and they were going for a BCS game I can assure you that Texas Tech, Baylor, SMU, north Texas State and UH fans were hoping week in and week out that TCU would get crushed and have those hoped ripped from them (Rice fans were studying and did not know the games were on)

I can assure you that had any of the above teams been in the MWC with TCU their fans for the most part would have hoped to see TCU get crushed and not make a BCS game and it would have been ever more prevalent the more Texas teams in the conference with them because it would have hurt those fans feelings and they viewed it as TCU doing something they were going to have to hear about for years and years at work

while with just TCU in the MWC from Texas sure every MWC fan (especially of good teams those years) wanted their team to beat TCU, but as those teams went down to TCU it was much easier for their fans to cheer for TCU even against other conference teams because it was meaningful for the conference in prestige and dollars and sure there were fans that still wanted them to lose even just because "if it is not us then screw everyone else", but in general I think you will find those are fans of programs that suck and it will nevAR be their team because their team and FANS suck and are only ever concerned with themselves and only care when their team is good (which is pretty much never)

hell there are Texas Tech fans that HATE TCU and Baylor even more now than ever because both of those teams have been to the BCS and there were thousands and thousands of Texas Tech fans (tens of thousands) that thought it was just great that Baylor was beaten by UCF and they cared nothing of what it meant to the Big 12 and they were glad when Texas was beaten by Oregon soundly........but of course they fail to recognize that no one has ever seen Texas Tech as leading the Big 12 in anything because they have never lead the big 12 in anything which is why they were an also ran in conference realignment......and of course they are not smart enough to figure out that the big 12 is most stable when the teams that win the conference beat other teams in BCS games and when the teams that are seen as the top teams in the conference (even in down years) beat other teams in bowl games

but with 4 Texas teams in the conference the competition is just too thick for some fans of some teams to take and the actively cheer for those teams to fail even if it means the conference itself looks incredibly weak (and then they openly wonder why no one looks at their team that has never won the conference or sniffed a BCS game as a skirt tail hanger on er)

I was one of those who rooted against tcu, but because I got tired of their coach and core group of fans whining about how they were not getting enough respect from the media and the polls nor enough folks to come out to games. It must not have been apparent to them that in this huge metro area with every pro sport and numerous other things for people to do, large crowds of folks would not come out to watch tcu vs wyoming or fresno state..and while the frogs would thump those guys every week the pollsters just went ho hum. basically the same thing facing smu and unt..and uta if they were to restart football.

(05-30-2014 09:41 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Basically you are arguing get really big so you can play regional.

There's a logic to that, though.
You get the cost savings of regional (or somewhat regional) along with the economies of having TV centralized, and selling some regional and some national. I think the idea of numerically smaller leagues, but with an alliance and an overall umbrella is intriguing.
I believe you were hovering around this idea as one of the possibilities in one of your posts way above.
I personally am not supportive of hyper-regional; you get into issues of market cannibalization, erosion of some product differentiation that you built up, and, frankly, boredom.

(05-30-2014 01:31 PM)DrBox Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 09:41 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Basically you are arguing get really big so you can play regional.

There's a logic to that, though.
You get the cost savings of regional (or somewhat regional) along with the economies of having TV centralized, and selling some regional and some national. I think the idea of numerically smaller leagues, but with an alliance and an overall umbrella is intriguing.
I believe you were hovering around this idea as one of the possibilities in one of your posts way above.
I personally am not supportive of hyper-regional; you get into issues of market cannibalization, erosion of some product differentiation that you built up, and, frankly, boredom.

Depends on what you mean by hyper-regional. A conference that stretches from far west Texas to the Mississippi River or to Mississippi or Alabama that has 12 teams is far more regional than anything else across that footprint with likely most schools far enough apart that they aren't competing for the same fans and even where you have proximate schools (ie. SMU/UNT and Rice/UH) they aren't even competing for the same fan and in most cases not even the same player. Likewise a conference running from Virginia/West Virginia to Florida and running up through Georgia or Alabama in to Tennessee and Kentucky still covers a large footprint despite it being smaller than any current footprint in the region.

But uber leagues make some sense because you can become so large you aren't tied into going a thousand miles to face a league opponent but get the benefit of combined negotiation power.

The CUSA TV package was announced and it appears Arkstfan may be on to something. CBS-Sports only took 7 CUSA conference games---only one Saturday intraconference game. Matt Sarzyniak comments on the announced schedule below. Reading his comments leads me to believe there may very well not be a lot of bidding for the CUSA TV package.

http://mattsarzsports.blogspot.com/2014/...edule.html



EDIT--sorry I missed it. Apparently there is a whole other thread on this exact article.

(05-30-2014 02:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The CUSA TV package was announced and it appears Arkstfan may be on to something. CBS-Sports only took 7 CUSA conference games---only one Saturday intraconference game. Matt Sarzyniak comments on the announced schedule below. Reading his comments leads me to believe there may very well not be a lot of bidding for the CUSA TV package.

http://mattsarzsports.blogspot.com/2014/...edule.html

Fox may pick up the slack but from reading the blog it sounds like CUSA may see more games pushed to regional telecast rather than FS1, which is entirely possible given that Fox has acquired additional rights and last year the Pac-12 and Big XII refused to release a number of games to FS1 until they got their carriage agreements to the 90 million home level which happened close to season so they quite possibly were unable to carry everything they were entitled to.

This year looks to be different and of course the 800 TON gorilla of B1G top tier rights is still looming. If Fox gets all or a piece of it, the situation will just get worse.

(05-26-2014 10:48 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  No one from CUSA will be moving to the SBC or at least not unless it gets so bad money dries up and schools need to cut their budgets by 30%...

that's the ONLY WAY you might see more regional conferences. But doesn't that go against what most of our schools fought to get away from and how we ended up where we are today?

It's not the "TV dollars" that's making schools like muts, WKU, UNT switch conferences. In WKU's case it's the names on the jerseys of our opponents that attracted Western to CUSA. Old basketball rivals

The potential for more NCAA Units is greater in CUSA and could easily be worth more than any TV money that might be lost

Agreed not in the short run based purely on pride. However, if TV money basically becomes a non factor those travel costs bills might nudge a team or two to move eventually especially if the Belt continues to consistently be an overall better conference than CUSA like it has the last two years. I expect a step back in the next few years especially if we add another non powerhouse FCS team but it will be interesting to see where this all lands in five years. I got a feeling the saying "He who laughs last" might come into play.

(05-30-2014 02:51 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 10:48 AM)WKUYG Wrote:  No one from CUSA will be moving to the SBC or at least not unless it gets so bad money dries up and schools need to cut their budgets by 30%...

that's the ONLY WAY you might see more regional conferences. But doesn't that go against what most of our schools fought to get away from and how we ended up where we are today?

It's not the "TV dollars" that's making schools like muts, WKU, UNT switch conferences. In WKU's case it's the names on the jerseys of our opponents that attracted Western to CUSA. Old basketball rivals

The potential for more NCAA Units is greater in CUSA and could easily be worth more than any TV money that might be lost

Agreed not in the short run based purely on pride. However, if TV money basically becomes a non factor those travel costs bills might nudge a team or two to move eventually especially if the Belt continues to consistently be an overall better conference than CUSA like it has the last two years. I expect a step back in the next few years especially if we add another non powerhouse FCS team but it will be interesting to see where this all lands in five years. I got a feeling the saying "He who laughs last" might come into play.

What is the value of a 14 team conference that averages 3 NCAA units per year vs a 12 conference that will be one unit two years out of three and that other year get two units?

In the 14 team league, the unit share per team is $331,715
In the 12 team league, the unit share per teams is $172,000.

It would take 13 years to pay off a $2 million entry fee on the strength of that and that's without accounting for the time value of money because the entry fee generally has to be paid within the first two years so that's before inflation devalues those dollars.

(05-28-2014 12:08 PM)TStatebobcat Wrote:  

(05-28-2014 10:26 AM)Buccaneerlover Wrote:  

(05-28-2014 10:09 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(05-28-2014 09:44 AM)Buccaneerlover Wrote:  

(05-26-2014 10:17 AM)AppManDG Wrote:  It's been my opinion for some time now CUSA's new line up will result in far less TV dollars when their next TV contract is rolled out. The SunBelt's TV money will likely stay about the same. While I agree there will likely be some realignment among CUSA and the SunBelt I think it will be more of a re-shuffling of the deck among to create more regional conferences. I do not see a conference featuring the "so called best of the three" being created just to compete with the AAC & MWC.

It is wishful thinking on my part, but it would make sense to see exit fees waived in order to settle this thing once and for all.

We have a winner with the regional conferences!!! And guess what, that's going to include Liberty, JMU, EKU, UT-C, ETSU, Montana, Montana State, Sam Houston State, Missouri State, Lamar, Richmond, North Dakota State, and potentially a few others looking to get in the mix.
These whispers have been going on forever it seems like, the playoff has set into motion what will eventually be another split into Division I, one where I honestly believe what we know as FCS will drop their numbers down to around 53-55 scholarships max and those programs that want to step up, will with a new division that supports around 70-75 scholarships with a smaller stipend (an extra 500-1000) for "full cost." I don't believe it to happen next week, but within the next 5-10 years, this is where we're headed.

I don't think we're headed that far primarily because the current G5 would have no interest competing with many of those FCS teams.

We'll gladly bring one or two in that make sense, but G5 will always be combined with the P5, and always be above FCS.

You won't have a choice. History has a funny way of repeating itself, there will be a period of open transition for teams that want to move up. And of the ones mentioned, Richmond, Montana, Montana State, Sam Houston, North Dakota State, EKU, and Liberty have all had recent playoff success. UT-C has drastically improved under Huesman and continues to do so, even with attendance. ETSU is slashing Olympic budgets to throw at football and have a championship level program (look at the hires on the field and in administration). Fans of G5 programs have to realize you're not in a position to thumb your noses at programs looking to move up/improve themselves, all of you were once there and are still trying to get better.
Regional, geographic conferences are much more beneficial for all of the mentioned schools and in the G5 conferences. The TV money is table scraps, so focus on perfecting web streams and getting fannies in the seats. Close rivalries, familiarity with schools. ETSU fans have experienced it first hand the last decade not playing Appalachian, Western Carolina, UT-C, and other regional teams and instead playing Stetson and A-Sun teams. It was a disaster and fans didn't show up.
Give it time, it will be to that extreme.

G5 schools have spilled a lot of blood, sweat and tears to get to and/or to stay at this level. TxSt, as an example, has spent close to 100 milion dollars in the last 10-11 years in preparation for the move up. G5 will not allow FCS teams to join FBS unless those schools commit to substantial facility upgrades. Anything else is just crazy talk.

I agree room has run out and last I heard forming a new conference is next to impossible and would likely get shot down by the NCAA anyway. The Belt is just not taking warm bodies anymore basically there is one spot left in the FBS for the forseeable future. I cant wrapped my head around how some teams dont get that. Say what you want about Liberty but atleast they get how valuable that last spot is.

(05-29-2014 05:57 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Funny but the people I know in the ad industry if you ask them about ad rates based on TV market they laugh and say "we've invented computers since then."

They pay for audience reached not potentially reached.

But the discussion there was focusing on carriage fees, where reaching ten people who would keep subscribing anyway even if you dropped the channel can be less valuable than reaching one person who would drop the subscription (either altogether or the service tier) without that channel.

That is still not the same as "households in the market" ~ households in the market getting the channel may be the terms that the contract are written for, just as ad rates are per thousand "impressions" (CPM), but the carriage rates have a relationship with the size of the distinct cohort that has an appreciable risk of going elsewhere if the channel is not there.

Which often favors P5 conference that have areas around their most followed schools where cable having the conference vs satellite not would see satellite dishes disappearing like water on a hot griddle, or satellite having it when cable does not see satellite dishes springing up like forest mushrooms after a summer rain.

For a Go5 conference, the question whether that favors them or hurts them depends on whether their smaller audience tends to include a larger or smaller share of strongly committed fans. A larger share opens up hopes of, eg, media networks paying for the rights to drive cable company or ISP subscription to online streaming carriage.