(07-02-2014 07:59 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I would think if you told college football experts back in 1984 that the MAC would still be a viable league at the top level of college football many of them would be surprised. For its first decade of 1-AA play the MAC was the red headed stepchild of the top level of football, rarely acknowledged to be a part of it.

The MAC was never affected by the formation of the Big East 1.0 or CUSA 1.0 football conferences in the early 90's. They did not lose even one school to those conferences. The only school at the time that remotely had a chance to move up was Toledo with a stellar glass bowl and they talked with CUSA but didn't just happen.

Once the independents were snatched up going the indy route was no longer a desired option. Conferences began to have the upper hand in attracting membership. NIU couldn't find another home so ended up returning to the MAC. Buffalo got into the MAC due to a stadium built for the world university games. Marshall wanted CUSA but with a smaller market had to settle for the MAC. UCF even became desperate enough to join the MAC FB-Only and was about to move all sports to the MAC until CUSA 2.0 happened.

Then Big East 2.0/CUSA 2.0 movement occurred 10 years ago. The Big East raided CUSA of its basketball power. CUSA added 4 WAC (UTEP, SMU, Rice, Tulsa) and 2 MAC schools as a replacement (Marshall, UCF). After 10 years of membership growth adding NIU, Buffalo, Marshall and UCF the MAC finally lost two of those schools. I have inside sources that have said that Toledo also had a standing offer to join CUSA at the time but declined.

Most recently was Big East 3.0/CUSA 3.0 movement. This time instead of being raided by CUSA, the MAC was raided by the Big East losing Temple. Ohio I know was also looking at a move to the Big East. For a school to make a move it has to be a clear athletic AND academic jump. What has happened is that CUSA has been decimated to the point where they've had to bring in 4 SBC schools and 2 FCS call ups, schools of even lower caliber than the MAC. Instead of a MAC school potentially looking to slide up to the 8th best conference in CUSA the only real upgrade option is the #6 best conference in the AAC.

As of right now the jury is still out on whether the AAC is even going to make it plus there is a new MAC TV deal set to be signed by the start of September. UMass was told to leave the conference, further boosting conference strength. The MAC has made membership additions to Olympic sports like getting Missouri that have helped the conference. The MAC has been known to be a stable conference now has an unprecedented level of stability. Five bowl tie-ins, a dream once thought unobtainable for the conference is now a reality. A CFP revenue sharing deal that justifies the MAC at the FBS level.

The question is what does the future hold? Will the G5 continue to cooperate as they did with bowls or will dynamics eventually usher in more instability? The goal for the MAC was to have what the old WAC did. Leadership thought that with the size of the universities they have that there should be no reason why they couldn't get a TV deal like the old WAC 16, for a few million a year. Today the MAC asks the question why can't we have with the MWC and AAC have in football AND in basketball? They want to have 2-3 schools in the dance every year and win access bowls. The question is can they get there or will the AAC pluck a few schools away first?

A dynamic that could come into play is the return of the Independent. If a school like UConn decided that it wanted to join the Big East in basketball and become an Independent they would have BYU, Army and UMass to play every year. If the AAC died with UC to the ACC and Memphis/UConn to the Big East but Indy in football that might open the door for other Eastern independents. Ohio and Buffalo to the A10 and Indy in football. Then you start to build a new generation of Eastern Independents that could play football among themselves. If the G5 signed a TV deal as a group that would cover independents then you have a wedge for more independents forming. With bowl saturation as it is you don't need to have a conference anymore to earn a tie and in fact it could give you leverage in seeking one.

Memphis (Big East)
Ohio (Atlantic 10)
Buffalo (Atlantic 10)
Army (Patriot)
UMass (Atlantic 10)
UConn (Big East)
Navy (Patriot)
BYU (West Coast)
Air Force (West Coast)

Then you have a very solid group of Independents that would be a competitive group as any among the G5 while staying in a regional basketball configuration. This quite honestly is going to be more in the interest of BYU than joining the AAC. It would require both the AAC to fail and the MAC to fail to get schools like Ohio and Buffalo interested in taking a risk as an independent.

St Bona would block SUNY Buffalo. Ohio isn't really on the A-10 radar right now either (and I don't know how Dayton feels about it).

Why would the MAC split. They are the most stable G5 conference out there.

(07-04-2014 11:04 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 07:59 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I would think if you told college football experts back in 1984 that the MAC would still be a viable league at the top level of college football many of them would be surprised. For its first decade of 1-AA play the MAC was the red headed stepchild of the top level of football, rarely acknowledged to be a part of it.

The MAC was never affected by the formation of the Big East 1.0 or CUSA 1.0 football conferences in the early 90's. They did not lose even one school to those conferences. The only school at the time that remotely had a chance to move up was Toledo with a stellar glass bowl and they talked with CUSA but didn't just happen.

Once the independents were snatched up going the indy route was no longer a desired option. Conferences began to have the upper hand in attracting membership. NIU couldn't find another home so ended up returning to the MAC. Buffalo got into the MAC due to a stadium built for the world university games. Marshall wanted CUSA but with a smaller market had to settle for the MAC. UCF even became desperate enough to join the MAC FB-Only and was about to move all sports to the MAC until CUSA 2.0 happened.

Then Big East 2.0/CUSA 2.0 movement occurred 10 years ago. The Big East raided CUSA of its basketball power. CUSA added 4 WAC (UTEP, SMU, Rice, Tulsa) and 2 MAC schools as a replacement (Marshall, UCF). After 10 years of membership growth adding NIU, Buffalo, Marshall and UCF the MAC finally lost two of those schools. I have inside sources that have said that Toledo also had a standing offer to join CUSA at the time but declined.

Most recently was Big East 3.0/CUSA 3.0 movement. This time instead of being raided by CUSA, the MAC was raided by the Big East losing Temple. Ohio I know was also looking at a move to the Big East. For a school to make a move it has to be a clear athletic AND academic jump. What has happened is that CUSA has been decimated to the point where they've had to bring in 4 SBC schools and 2 FCS call ups, schools of even lower caliber than the MAC. Instead of a MAC school potentially looking to slide up to the 8th best conference in CUSA the only real upgrade option is the #6 best conference in the AAC.

As of right now the jury is still out on whether the AAC is even going to make it plus there is a new MAC TV deal set to be signed by the start of September. UMass was told to leave the conference, further boosting conference strength. The MAC has made membership additions to Olympic sports like getting Missouri that have helped the conference. The MAC has been known to be a stable conference now has an unprecedented level of stability. Five bowl tie-ins, a dream once thought unobtainable for the conference is now a reality. A CFP revenue sharing deal that justifies the MAC at the FBS level.

The question is what does the future hold? Will the G5 continue to cooperate as they did with bowls or will dynamics eventually usher in more instability? The goal for the MAC was to have what the old WAC did. Leadership thought that with the size of the universities they have that there should be no reason why they couldn't get a TV deal like the old WAC 16, for a few million a year. Today the MAC asks the question why can't we have with the MWC and AAC have in football AND in basketball? They want to have 2-3 schools in the dance every year and win access bowls. The question is can they get there or will the AAC pluck a few schools away first?

A dynamic that could come into play is the return of the Independent. If a school like UConn decided that it wanted to join the Big East in basketball and become an Independent they would have BYU, Army and UMass to play every year. If the AAC died with UC to the ACC and Memphis/UConn to the Big East but Indy in football that might open the door for other Eastern independents. Ohio and Buffalo to the A10 and Indy in football. Then you start to build a new generation of Eastern Independents that could play football among themselves. If the G5 signed a TV deal as a group that would cover independents then you have a wedge for more independents forming. With bowl saturation as it is you don't need to have a conference anymore to earn a tie and in fact it could give you leverage in seeking one.

Memphis (Big East)
Ohio (Atlantic 10)
Buffalo (Atlantic 10)
Army (Patriot)
UMass (Atlantic 10)
UConn (Big East)
Navy (Patriot)
BYU (West Coast)
Air Force (West Coast)

Then you have a very solid group of Independents that would be a competitive group as any among the G5 while staying in a regional basketball configuration. This quite honestly is going to be more in the interest of BYU than joining the AAC. It would require both the AAC to fail and the MAC to fail to get schools like Ohio and Buffalo interested in taking a risk as an independent.

St Bona would block SUNY Buffalo. Ohio isn't really on the A-10 radar right now either (and I don't know how Dayton feels about it).

Ohio's basketball budget is at the top of the MAC and would place it in the middle tier of the A-10. They also have a 13,000 seat basketball arena to work with.

Buffalo has a lot of potential to fund a basketball program located in a good sized market without an NBA franchise. They recently hired Bobby Hurley who had a nice season his first year at the helm. The A-10 is running out of quality basketball options on the East Coast therefore I wouldn't remove this school from the list of possibilities.

Maybe weeknights aren't an attendance issue for MAC schools but I know they are a problem at AState. The fans with younger kids start disappearing at half no matter how close a game it is. I sit in premium donor seats and Tuesday and Thursday night crowds usually see a lot of open seats among people who are paying a minimum of $62.50 a seat, per game.

We draw a significant number of people from two hours away (Little Rock) and an hour away (Memphis). I have to be on the road no later than 3pm to make a 6pm kickoff and that's pushing it because the stadium traffic gets balled up with the people going home from work. The last Thursday game it took me over 45 minutes to drive the final 3 miles.

(07-03-2014 11:55 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Issue with the MAC is the fan bases and mirroring the Big Ten footprint. Their students graduates wanted to go to big ten schools.
And having games on Wed and some Tuesday nights kills any alumni attendance.

No. First this is G5 football not statewide P5 action so you've got to compare it to leagues like the MWC and the AAC. The main reason why the MAC doesn't draw as well as those conferences is because there isn't enough talent in the Great Lakes region to support 12 strong G5 programs.

At any given time the MAC is about 5 schools deep and very top heavy due to a few schools gobbling up all the MAC level recruits. This doesn't leave the bottom program with much as they end up with a revolving door of coaches. The bottom schools are unable to win their non-conference games resulting in a lot of 1-11 and 2-10 records in the league. Its very hard to generate support for a small market program that is so uncompetitive.

You cannot fool the students. They will come out to watch a team if they are nationally competitive. If horrible or just an OK MAC team they won't turn out unless they have a ranked team in the house. Having a ranked team at home is a highly unusual circumstances in the MAC. You don't get an East Carolina situation either where you can get 2 Big Ten schools in the stadium every year, like what ECU has done with the regional ACC schools visiting at home.

Once you factor in the topology of football in the great lakes region, the lack of strong attendance in the MAC is completely understandable. I don't think the weather is even that much of a factor in the MAC as some think. These schools just haven't been as competitive nationally as Boise State and Fresno State have over the past 15 years.

(07-04-2014 08:19 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(07-04-2014 06:49 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:55 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Issue with the MAC is the fan bases and mirroring the Big Ten footprint. Their students graduates wanted to go to big ten schools.
And having games on Wed and some Tuesday nights kills any alumni attendance.

there's a direct correlation between winning and alumni attendance but there's no correlation between alumni attendance and scheduling. In fact, because ESPN prefers to have the better teams showcased in the weeknight games the MAC teams that play the most weeknight games also tend to have the highest average attendance. MACtion does not kill alumni attendance.

Sometimes, maybe even often, ESPN gets lucky and pics the right matchups for mac teams.
Consistent is the best indicator. But because a Wed night game, as an example, between BGSU and Ohio draws well, that same game might might draw better on Saturday and fans and Alums prefer a Saturday.

and its also about relativity- attendance numbers are so small in the MAC anyways, is a difference of ~2K in attendance a big difference or small one? depends on your perspective.

For MAC fans, I was driving back from Michigan a few years, on a Sunday morning, and as I was passing BGSUs
stadium....it looked tailgaters were packing up and leaving. Can you spend the night (talking about non RVs)
there in the tailgating area?

How detrimental weekday night games are on attendance really depends on the school and timing. Late year games for a team with a poor record would be a bad draw but they would be a bad draw even on a weekend. Even worse if it is late in the year with really bad weather. However some schools make it work. Kent State has some of their bigger games on week nights. The reason is that despite having a large population living on and next to campus many students do not stay for football games (or anything else really) after the start of the year. This makes the Saturdays after homecoming not as desirable as weekdays since all of those students are on campus on weekdays and are often looking for good excuses to have a good time on a week night (we serve beer at the stadium too so there is no issue with competing with people wanting alcohol). On the games before Homecoming as long as the team looks pretty decent attendance seems good regardless (well good for Kent State that is). As for Kent's attendance since starting weeknight games on TV overall Kent's attendance is better now than it was with all Saturday games back in the day (part of that is that Kent is trying harder too on that front).

The one day that I will not defend (for almost anyone) is right around Thanksgiving such as Black Friday. Those games are ALWAYS bad for a MAC school almost no matter how well you are doing.

(07-02-2014 07:59 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  The MAC was never affected by the formation of the Big East 1.0 or CUSA 1.0 football conferences in the early 90's. They did not lose even one school to those conferences. The only school at the time that remotely had a chance to move up was Toledo with a stellar glass bowl and they talked with CUSA but didn't just happen.

Just a nitpick, but Miami was included in those talks as well.

(07-04-2014 05:39 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  How detrimental weekday night games are on attendance really depends on the school and timing. Late year games for a team with a poor record would be a bad draw but they would be a bad draw even on a weekend. Even worse if it is late in the year with really bad weather. However some schools make it work.

This. NIU nearly sold out a weeknight game against Ball State, Miami drew no more than 3,000 butts in the seats against Buffalo. If Miami becomes a consistent winner again we'll draw a decent crowd for MACtion against OU or another decent team.

The bottom line is that the MAC isn't alone in attendance problems overall, especially when it's highlighted on national television. Washington State, a P5 bowl team, barely drew 20,000 for a weeknight game against a ranked Arizona State team. The only reason people notice the MAC is because we're known for MACtion game, people wouldn't really care if we were always shoved to ESPN3 for November Saturday games.

(07-04-2014 11:33 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 07:59 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  The MAC was never affected by the formation of the Big East 1.0 or CUSA 1.0 football conferences in the early 90's. They did not lose even one school to those conferences. The only school at the time that remotely had a chance to move up was Toledo with a stellar glass bowl and they talked with CUSA but didn't just happen.

Just a nitpick, but Miami was included in those talks as well.

Toledo was the target school for CUSA but Toledo demanded a few MAC schools to come with them in order to make a move.

What should have happened was a MAC split with Marshall and UCF plus adding a school like Memphis to upgrade the hoop profile. Instead MAC leadership let Marshall/UCF walk out the door and it might have happened to Toledo too had they not demanded multiple MAC schools to be involved (going to 14). Marshall was advocating for Ohio then as one of them. Bob Marcum loved our athletic mall. Miami's name did pop up in some of the papers with regard to a list of schools CUSA was considering.

Boeh the Ohio AD (now Fresno St) thought the MAC would have everything CUSA has in a couple of years so why move? Time has proven him to be mostly correct. The primary target though at the time was Toledo which had a standing invite. Ohio maybe if CUSA moved to 14.

When CUSA 3.0 was forming, Ohio this time was a top candidate to join and had a site visit but Ohio was aiming for the Big East so passed on CUSA. When the BE imploded, Ohio made a decision that it wanted to stay in a bus league and scratched both the AAC/CUSA off at the same time as options. Again with the new TV deal the MAC could have something on par with the AAC/MWC without the high travel costs so why make a move?

(07-05-2014 01:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(07-04-2014 11:33 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(07-02-2014 07:59 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  The MAC was never affected by the formation of the Big East 1.0 or CUSA 1.0 football conferences in the early 90's. They did not lose even one school to those conferences. The only school at the time that remotely had a chance to move up was Toledo with a stellar glass bowl and they talked with CUSA but didn't just happen.

Just a nitpick, but Miami was included in those talks as well.

Toledo was the target school for CUSA but Toledo demanded a few MAC schools to come with them in order to make a move.

What should have happened was a MAC split with Marshall and UCF plus adding a school like Memphis to upgrade the hoop profile. Instead MAC leadership let Marshall/UCF walk out the door and it might have happened to Toledo too had they not demanded multiple MAC schools to be involved (going to 14). Marshall was advocating for Ohio then as one of them. Bob Marcum loved our athletic mall. Miami's name did pop up in some of the papers with regard to a list of schools CUSA was considering.

Boeh the Ohio AD (now Fresno St) thought the MAC would have everything CUSA has in a couple of years so why move? Time has proven him to be mostly correct. The primary target though at the time was Toledo which had a standing invite. Ohio maybe if CUSA moved to 14.

When CUSA 3.0 was forming, Ohio this time was a top candidate to join and had a site visit but Ohio was aiming for the Big East so passed on CUSA. When the BE imploded, Ohio made a decision that it wanted to stay in a bus league and scratched both the AAC/CUSA off at the same time as options. Again with the new TV deal the MAC could have something on par with the AAC/MWC without the high travel costs so why make a move?

Hearing about this new TV deal since February. Delay after delay and now you guys are saying around the start of football games. You say it is going to cost ESPN 12 Million per year. The current contract runs through 2016-17 and its for 1 Million and change. I would not be surprised seeing post about this new TV deal on Black Friday and still no new contract. My guess the it will be after Thanksgiving before anything official happens.

By then ESPN will have a year more data on all the conferences and could change the deal.

The value in the T.V. deal is the day of the week.
A MAC fan posted that and its true only game on.

What would stop ESPN from cutting MACTION in half.
The Sun Belt could fill half the slots for example.
I say SBC because they have the rights to both.
They could split the games up and pay both conferences less .
Not less than the current contracts but less than the MAC fans are expecting.

(07-05-2014 08:44 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hearing about this new TV deal since February. Delay after delay and now you guys are saying around the start of football games. You say it is going to cost ESPN 12 Million per year. The current contract runs through 2016-17 and its for 1 Million and change. I would not be surprised seeing post about this new TV deal on Black Friday and still no new contract. My guess the it will be after Thanksgiving before anything official happens.

By then ESPN will have a year more data on all the conferences and could change the deal.

There are several legit sources concerning the TV deal. The Cincinnati Enquirer was quoted at saying at least $1 million per year per team ($12 million+), Miami's Athletic Director also is on our website in a video throwing out a number and saying it is basically a done deal. The Cleveland newspaper just 2 days ago said it was originally supposed to be signed by end of spring (UMass leaving and JMU now not getting an invite) but may slip to the end of summer. My guess is it will be announced near the MAC media days. I think a Grant of Rights will be a part of this contract and is why ESPN will be paying a premium for long-term Wednesday Night Programming as the MAC membership will be stable and predictable unlike what the Sun Belt can offer. The MAC schools are all happy being in the same league together. The AAC teams are probably being paid less then what they could because nobody wants to pay too much and be locked into a league deal where most of the teams want out. NBC's clause about being able to renegotiate if Team A vs Team B leaves indicates that. The same thing is with the Sun Belt and CUSA. The CUSA just saw all their premium schools leave to the AAC and now CBS Sports Network is biding their time and reducing games until they can get out from under the $$ they have to pay per the contract. The MAC and Mountain West are the most stable and predictable G5 conferences for the networks.

(07-05-2014 10:45 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2014 08:44 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hearing about this new TV deal since February. Delay after delay and now you guys are saying around the start of football games. You say it is going to cost ESPN 12 Million per year. The current contract runs through 2016-17 and its for 1 Million and change. I would not be surprised seeing post about this new TV deal on Black Friday and still no new contract. My guess the it will be after Thanksgiving before anything official happens.

By then ESPN will have a year more data on all the conferences and could change the deal.

There are several legit sources concerning the TV deal. The Cincinnati Enquirer was quoted at saying at least $1 million per year per team ($12 million+), Miami's Athletic Director also is on our website in a video throwing out a number and saying it is basically a done deal. The Cleveland newspaper just 2 days ago said it was originally supposed to be signed by end of spring (UMass leaving and JMU now not getting an invite) but may slip to the end of summer. My guess is it will be announced near the MAC media days. I think a Grant of Rights will be a part of this contract and is why ESPN will be paying a premium for long-term Wednesday Night Programming as the MAC membership will be stable and predictable unlike what the Sun Belt can offer. The MAC schools are all happy being in the same league together. The AAC teams are probably being paid less then what they could because nobody wants to pay too much and be locked into a league deal where most of the teams want out. NBC's clause about being able to renegotiate if Team A vs Team B leaves indicates that. The same thing is with the Sun Belt and CUSA. The CUSA just saw all their premium schools leave to the AAC and now CBS Sports Network is biding their time and reducing games until they can get out from under the $$ they have to pay per the contract. The MAC and Mountain West are the most stable and predictable G5 conferences for the networks.

For what? Which P5/G5 conference is taking a school from the MAC?? Moreover, the MAC is a solid and stable conference so a GOR would be pointless in my opinion.....

(07-05-2014 02:58 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(07-05-2014 10:45 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2014 08:44 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hearing about this new TV deal since February. Delay after delay and now you guys are saying around the start of football games. You say it is going to cost ESPN 12 Million per year. The current contract runs through 2016-17 and its for 1 Million and change. I would not be surprised seeing post about this new TV deal on Black Friday and still no new contract. My guess the it will be after Thanksgiving before anything official happens.

By then ESPN will have a year more data on all the conferences and could change the deal.

There are several legit sources concerning the TV deal. The Cincinnati Enquirer was quoted at saying at least $1 million per year per team ($12 million+), Miami's Athletic Director also is on our website in a video throwing out a number and saying it is basically a done deal. The Cleveland newspaper just 2 days ago said it was originally supposed to be signed by end of spring (UMass leaving and JMU now not getting an invite) but may slip to the end of summer. My guess is it will be announced near the MAC media days. I think a Grant of Rights will be a part of this contract and is why ESPN will be paying a premium for long-term Wednesday Night Programming as the MAC membership will be stable and predictable unlike what the Sun Belt can offer. The MAC schools are all happy being in the same league together. The AAC teams are probably being paid less then what they could because nobody wants to pay too much and be locked into a league deal where most of the teams want out. NBC's clause about being able to renegotiate if Team A vs Team B leaves indicates that. The same thing is with the Sun Belt and CUSA. The CUSA just saw all their premium schools leave to the AAC and now CBS Sports Network is biding their time and reducing games until they can get out from under the $$ they have to pay per the contract. The MAC and Mountain West are the most stable and predictable G5 conferences for the networks.

For what? Which P5/G5 conference is taking a school from the MAC?? Moreover, the MAC is a solid and stable conference so a GOR would be pointless in my opinion.....

Just passing along the rumorville, thats all. It could have been more directed toward if UMass was going to join or any other eastern expansion partners like JMU. But I think TV like this too as it protects them. CBS Sports was the one floating this out there mainly. Many conferences have this now GoR now - Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, etc. it would be for the length of the TV contract only. These Grant of Rights also give ESPN the power to do what they want at whatever level it specifies. For instance the Big Ten needed it for the Big Ten Network but the Big XII GoR does not include Tier 3.
Did the SEC need one for the Raycom buyout and to launch the SEC Network? Its not always just about keeping membership together.

I'd guess that the MAC was interested in a GoR for UMass and JMU if that would have happened but it was also rumored that schools like Northern Illinois was also pushing it because they would not want to be left in a league without Toledo, Ohio, etc.

ESPN might also request this for all digital rights at tier 3 for their new WatchESPN Conference Networks they are beginning to tinker with and I think will go beyond just reorganizing the WatchESPN app. It'd be ala-carte conference programming for both cable broadcasts and ESPN3.

Notice how both the MAC and ACC have these new channels beginning to form on WatchESPN but the American Conference was specifically excluded from that new arrangement and they don't have a GoR and all their schools are looking for an exit? MAC, ACC, and AAC are all ESPN properties so what else explains why the AAC was specifically ruled out?

(07-05-2014 03:17 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2014 02:58 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(07-05-2014 10:45 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(07-05-2014 08:44 AM)Steve1981 Wrote:  Hearing about this new TV deal since February. Delay after delay and now you guys are saying around the start of football games. You say it is going to cost ESPN 12 Million per year. The current contract runs through 2016-17 and its for 1 Million and change. I would not be surprised seeing post about this new TV deal on Black Friday and still no new contract. My guess the it will be after Thanksgiving before anything official happens.

By then ESPN will have a year more data on all the conferences and could change the deal.

There are several legit sources concerning the TV deal. The Cincinnati Enquirer was quoted at saying at least $1 million per year per team ($12 million+), Miami's Athletic Director also is on our website in a video throwing out a number and saying it is basically a done deal. The Cleveland newspaper just 2 days ago said it was originally supposed to be signed by end of spring (UMass leaving and JMU now not getting an invite) but may slip to the end of summer. My guess is it will be announced near the MAC media days. I think a Grant of Rights will be a part of this contract and is why ESPN will be paying a premium for long-term Wednesday Night Programming as the MAC membership will be stable and predictable unlike what the Sun Belt can offer. The MAC schools are all happy being in the same league together. The AAC teams are probably being paid less then what they could because nobody wants to pay too much and be locked into a league deal where most of the teams want out. NBC's clause about being able to renegotiate if Team A vs Team B leaves indicates that. The same thing is with the Sun Belt and CUSA. The CUSA just saw all their premium schools leave to the AAC and now CBS Sports Network is biding their time and reducing games until they can get out from under the $$ they have to pay per the contract. The MAC and Mountain West are the most stable and predictable G5 conferences for the networks.

For what? Which P5/G5 conference is taking a school from the MAC?? Moreover, the MAC is a solid and stable conference so a GOR would be pointless in my opinion.....

Just passing along the rumorville, thats all. It could have been more directed toward if UMass was going to join or any other eastern expansion partners like JMU. But I think TV like this too as it protects them. CBS Sports was the one floating this out there mainly. Many conferences have this now GoR now - Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, etc. it would be for the length of the TV contract only. These Grant of Rights also give ESPN the power to do what they want at whatever level it specifies. For instance the Big Ten needed it for the Big Ten Network but the Big XII GoR does not include Tier 3.
Did the SEC need one for the Raycom buyout and to launch the SEC Network? Its not always just about keeping membership together.

I'd guess that the MAC was interested in a GoR for UMass and JMU if that would have happened but it was also rumored that schools like Northern Illinois was also pushing it because they would not want to be left in a league without Toledo, Ohio, etc.

ESPN might also request this for all digital rights at tier 3 for their new WatchESPN Conference Networks they are beginning to tinker with and I think will go beyond just reorganizing the WatchESPN app. It'd be ala-carte conference programming for both cable broadcasts and ESPN3.

Notice how both the MAC and ACC have these new channels beginning to form on WatchESPN but the American Conference was specifically excluded from that new arrangement and they don't have a GoR and all their schools are looking for an exit? MAC, ACC, and AAC are all ESPN properties so what else explains why the AAC was specifically ruled out?

The ACC makes like 400x more money than the MAC so your example is not a good one (and I don't mean it in a negative way). The American doesn't have a GOR. However, ESPN has schools in two groups: Group A is UCONN, CINCI, Houston, Temple (I could be wrong about Temple) and Group B is all the other members. The more "valued" members are in group A. My point, ESPN took precautions with the American to protect its interest like you assume a GOR will protect ESPN with the MAC. Nevertheless, the only MAC schools that would leave are: UMASS (leaving), NIU (left and returned), and Buffalo.....

I like the MAC and Maction and don't see a split.
Just curious what others thought of the strength and weakness of a small footprint. Helps with cost but probably lowers the ceiling for members in a way.

Two Ohio schools along with at least one Michigan school leaving would help. Replacing those schools with three new schools in different states. C-USA could have added Toledo, WMU and Ohio for example . The teams may have benefited bye differentiating themselves from the other in state schools.
Playing them regularly out of conference.

(07-05-2014 03:55 PM)MJG Wrote:  I like the MAC and Maction and don't see a split.
Just curious what others thought of the strength and weakness of a small footprint. Helps with cost but probably lowers the ceiling for members in a way.

Two Ohio schools along with at least one Michigan school leaving would help. Replacing those schools with three new schools in different states. C-USA could have added Toledo, WMU and Ohio for example . The teams may have benefited bye differentiating themselves from the other in state schools.
Playing them regularly out of conference.

Who would want to give up this footprint?

Quote:The Mid-American Conference -- fresh off a Bowl Championship Series appearance -- and ESPN are expected to reopen media rights talks at the halfway point of an eight-year deal running to 2016-17, according to sources with direct knowledge of the situation.

Though it's premature to outline potential new terms, ESPN is amenable to a possible restructure as a good business practice with its midweek football partner.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...ights-deal