(05-09-2015 12:47 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 11:11 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  ...its widely known that is under valued.

It's widely known... where? In the imaginary world inside your head?

Meanwhile in the real world, the AAC's "value" is determined by what someone else is willing to pay for it. Which means the AAC is not "undervalued" at all.

Value is not static. It changes over time. A sale from early 2013 on the NYSE represents the "value" of that stock at that time. You'd be a complete idiot to think the price of that stock is the same today. The same thing happened to homes or other commodities. Value can be affected by external factors and internal factors. The AAC in early 2013 was effectively a short sale or a foreclosure sale. You had a highly motivated desperate seller under duress. The conference was viewed as crumbling and on the brink of collapse. Aresco feared the western AAC teams might bolt for the MW. Rumors of UConn and Cinci rejoining the Big East were floating about. He had to get a TV deal in place in order to stabilize the remains of his conference.

NBC thought they could get the conference for a song by offering what we needed most----excellent exposure on a national platform. It was far more exposure than ESPN was offering, but less money. NBC thought they didn't need to pay much because they "knew" ESPN could not match the exposure. NBC was wrong. So we ended up with great exposure on a better network (ESPN). ESPN paid less for the product, but was forced to air far more games than they preferred.

In 6 years the AAC will have had 6 years of P5 level national exposure. We will likely have several access bowl wins and a ton of NCAA tournament basketball games. We already have a BCS win and a basketball national championship in two short years. Last year was a weak year performance wise---but I suspect we come roaring back this year. Our ratings thus far have been quite good. We will be a better known proven more stable media property when this contract ends. ESPN knows that and they know they got a good deal. I fully expect they will look to extend our contract by year 4 at a significantly higher rate. When they did the same for the MAC the contract was a 10 fold increase. I don't expect that---but a double, triple, or quadruple would not be surprising.

(05-09-2015 12:47 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 11:11 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  ...its widely known that is under valued.

It's widely known... where? In the imaginary world inside your head?

Meanwhile in the real world, the AAC's "value" is determined by what someone else is willing to pay for it. Which means the AAC is not "undervalued" at all.

in the real other factors affect what you are willing to pay for

a projected top 5 picks gets arrested before the draft, he falls to the 6th round, that doesn't make his value 6th round...his value is still a first round players ..the 6th round picks is his value with the included risk that any any team willing to take him will get.....the question of at what point does his value outweigh his risk

we were at the edge of collapse and everyone thought so..we didn't just offer them content and they said it was worth 2 mil per...we had content that could very well have completely collapse in 3 months while asking for a 7 year deal and they said with the added risk we are willing to pay 2 mil per

the risk has dramatically become less significant ...so we are "undervalued" we were payed the price of a conference on the border of collapse but in reality ended up a stable conference

back to my first bad sports analogy, if a week after the draft , after he signed a 6th round contract, they find out that it was a completely false accusation and that he is completely innocent, they are going to be "we get a first round quality player in the 6th round for cheap" ...not we have 6th round player

The 'value' of a brand new, not even named yet (!), extremely unstable (no one even knew if the P5 were done raiding) conference full of demoted members complaining loudly in the media about how they want 'out' is indeed very low.

The 'value' of a 5 year old and stable conference with a bucket load of accomplishments, lots of new facilities, in huge media markets will be 'higher'. How much higher is yet to be seen.

Anyone who wants to pretend our 'value' is actually 2 mil per team on some oversimplified 'that's what we got paid' logic, and ignore all the MANY confounding influences, is just trolling. And we have a lot of that here... Whatever, we'll just see who's right in a few short years.

(05-08-2015 08:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Well, maybe we can. The unrest has officially begun. The special deal they gave Boise will eventually create tension between certain members. The UNLV AD is not happy and she's going public. Eventually, there will be a meeting at an Airport. Maybe Aresco will call it.


The Mountain West Conference's TV contract for football "has failed miserably for many schools, particularly UNLV," according to Ed Graney of the LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL. In the first two years of the league’s deal with CBS and ESPN, Boise State "will have made a conference-high" $3.7M from the Mountain West's bonus system, which "pays schools a specific amount for appearing on certain channels." Nine other schools "will have made anywhere from" $300,000 to $2.4M, while UNLV "will have made zero." Had the bonus money "been evenly distributed for two years," UNLV would have received $1.2M. UNLV AD Tina Kunzer-Murphy said, "It’s horrible. Everyone wants a piece of the pie. We’re no different. I’m concerned. Others are getting millions of dollars in this bonus system and we get nothing? It’s obviously a red flag." She added, "We have to get it changed, because it's not acceptable.


http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily...WC-TV.aspx

Attackcoog, Yes, I still think that the AAC CANT poach MWC teams.

The AAC can't poach MWC schools in 2015. But in 2020 or 2025? Maybe.

(05-08-2015 08:20 PM)PT_american Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 08:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Well, maybe we can. The unrest has officially begun. The special deal they gave Boise will eventually create between certain members. The UNLV AD is not happy and she's going public. Eventually, there will be a meeting at an Airport. Maybe Aresco will call it.


The Mountain West Conference's TV contract for football "has failed miserably for many schools, particularly UNLV," according to Ed Graney of the LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL. In the first two years of the league’s deal with CBS and ESPN, Boise State "will have made a conference-high" $3.7M from the Mountain West's bonus system, which "pays schools a specific amount for appearing on certain channels." Nine other schools "will have made anywhere from" $300,000 to $2.4M, while UNLV "will have made zero." Had the bonus money "been evenly distributed for two years," UNLV would have received $1.2M. UNLV AD Tina Kunzer-Murphy said, "It’s horrible. Everyone wants a piece of the pie. We’re no different. I’m concerned. Others are getting millions of dollars in this bonus system and we get nothing? It’s obviously a red flag." She added, "We have to get it changed, because it's not acceptable.


http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily...WC-TV.aspx

These type of deals always create animosity. Hence a good move by Aresco to walk away. I was a big fan of adding Boise but it would have ended poorly with this deal.

This same thing almost ripped the Big 12 apart.

It did (Ripped the Big1/2)... Nebraska Colorado and Tamu left

(05-09-2015 04:15 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC can't poach MWC schools in 2015. But in 2020 or 2025? Maybe.

G5 conference football will be so irrelevant by 2020 that it won't matter who is in what G5 conference. The P5 conferences have spoken, and you guys were dumped just like the rest of us. Thinking that some new combination of MWC and AAC schools will make the P5 powers that be realize how badly they need you is just plain asinine. The so called "access bowl" does not give someone access to the playoff, it only gives one access to an insignificant, non playoff bowl game that nobody gives a hoot about.

(05-10-2015 07:43 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-09-2015 04:15 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC can't poach MWC schools in 2015. But in 2020 or 2025? Maybe.

G5 conference football will be so irrelevant by 2020 that it won't matter who is in what G5 conference. The P5 conferences have spoken, and you guys were dumped just like the rest of us. Thinking that some new combination of MWC and AAC schools will make the P5 powers that be realize how badly they need you is just plain asinine. The so called "access bowl" does not give someone access to the playoff, it only gives one access to an insignificant, non playoff bowl game that nobody gives a hoot about.

Insignificant? I bet LaTech would love to play in that insignificant Access Bowl

(05-10-2015 07:48 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 07:43 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-09-2015 04:15 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC can't poach MWC schools in 2015. But in 2020 or 2025? Maybe.

G5 conference football will be so irrelevant by 2020 that it won't matter who is in what G5 conference. The P5 conferences have spoken, and you guys were dumped just like the rest of us. Thinking that some new combination of MWC and AAC schools will make the P5 powers that be realize how badly they need you is just plain asinine. The so called "access bowl" does not give someone access to the playoff, it only gives one access to an insignificant, non playoff bowl game that nobody gives a hoot about.

Insignificant? I bet LaTech would love to play in that insignificant Access Bowl

There's no doubt that we would. When I said insignificant, I meant insignificant in so far as the national championship goes.

(05-10-2015 08:00 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 07:48 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 07:43 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-09-2015 04:15 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC can't poach MWC schools in 2015. But in 2020 or 2025? Maybe.

G5 conference football will be so irrelevant by 2020 that it won't matter who is in what G5 conference. The P5 conferences have spoken, and you guys were dumped just like the rest of us. Thinking that some new combination of MWC and AAC schools will make the P5 powers that be realize how badly they need you is just plain asinine. The so called "access bowl" does not give someone access to the playoff, it only gives one access to an insignificant, non playoff bowl game that nobody gives a hoot about.

Insignificant? I bet LaTech would love to play in that insignificant Access Bowl

There's no doubt that we would. When I said insignificant, I meant insignificant in so far as the national championship goes.

So after your first lost all the rest of the games are insignificant? Alrighty then...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The Playoff is going to expand just to much money in it (you know how they worship that green stuff those greedy basta***). and when it does the G-5 will end up with one spot though it may take some legal, political type pressure to make it happen. The problem for us will be no matter how big the playoff becomes (16) the g-5 will always have only one spot.

Excellent post.

(05-10-2015 07:43 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-09-2015 04:15 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC can't poach MWC schools in 2015. But in 2020 or 2025? Maybe.

G5 conference football will be so irrelevant by 2020 that it won't matter who is in what G5 conference. The P5 conferences have spoken, and you guys were dumped just like the rest of us. Thinking that some new combination of MWC and AAC schools will make the P5 powers that be realize how badly they need you is just plain asinine. The so called "access bowl" does not give someone access to the playoff, it only gives one access to an insignificant, non playoff bowl game that nobody gives a hoot about.

The only problem with your logic is that tv controls it not the p5. Espn has been actively in talks with the AAC about elevating the conf. Espn is worth 7 billion dollars.

(05-08-2015 08:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Well, maybe we can. The unrest has officially begun. The special deal they gave Boise will eventually create tension between certain members. The UNLV AD is not happy and she's going public. Eventually, there will be a meeting at an Airport. Maybe Aresco will call it.


The Mountain West Conference's TV contract for football "has failed miserably for many schools, particularly UNLV," according to Ed Graney of the LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL. In the first two years of the league’s deal with CBS and ESPN, Boise State "will have made a conference-high" $3.7M from the Mountain West's bonus system, which "pays schools a specific amount for appearing on certain channels." Nine other schools "will have made anywhere from" $300,000 to $2.4M, while UNLV "will have made zero." Had the bonus money "been evenly distributed for two years," UNLV would have received $1.2M. UNLV AD Tina Kunzer-Murphy said, "It’s horrible. Everyone wants a piece of the pie. We’re no different. I’m concerned. Others are getting millions of dollars in this bonus system and we get nothing? It’s obviously a red flag." She added, "We have to get it changed, because it's not acceptable.


http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily...WC-TV.aspx

Attack, I agree the distribution is a problem for the MWC, but not sure you can say the "unrest has begun," and UNLV "is going public," b/c the article is from last December.

(05-10-2015 07:43 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-09-2015 04:15 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC can't poach MWC schools in 2015. But in 2020 or 2025? Maybe.

G5 conference football will be so irrelevant by 2020 that it won't matter who is in what G5 conference. The P5 conferences have spoken, and you guys were dumped just like the rest of us. Thinking that some new combination of MWC and AAC schools will make the P5 powers that be realize how badly they need you is just plain asinine. The so called "access bowl" does not give someone access to the playoff, it only gives one access to an insignificant, non playoff bowl game that nobody gives a hoot about.

Lord.....Another fan vomiting out the "all G5 conferences are the same" tripe. I guess i'd really want that to believe that as well if a national network had started dropping my conferences content (which they had already bought and paid for) and started paying additional rights fees to show another G5 conferences games instead.

If there were no difference then all G5s would be paid the same and would all have the same coverage on tv. Thats like saying Houston is just like Alabama cuz we are both FBS. But then, deep down inside, you already knew that.

(05-10-2015 09:44 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 08:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Well, maybe we can. The unrest has officially begun. The special deal they gave Boise will eventually create tension between certain members. The UNLV AD is not happy and she's going public. Eventually, there will be a meeting at an Airport. Maybe Aresco will call it.


The Mountain West Conference's TV contract for football "has failed miserably for many schools, particularly UNLV," according to Ed Graney of the LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL. In the first two years of the league’s deal with CBS and ESPN, Boise State "will have made a conference-high" $3.7M from the Mountain West's bonus system, which "pays schools a specific amount for appearing on certain channels." Nine other schools "will have made anywhere from" $300,000 to $2.4M, while UNLV "will have made zero." Had the bonus money "been evenly distributed for two years," UNLV would have received $1.2M. UNLV AD Tina Kunzer-Murphy said, "It’s horrible. Everyone wants a piece of the pie. We’re no different. I’m concerned. Others are getting millions of dollars in this bonus system and we get nothing? It’s obviously a red flag." She added, "We have to get it changed, because it's not acceptable.


http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily...WC-TV.aspx

Attack, I agree the distribution is a problem for the MWC, but not sure you can say the "unrest has begun," and UNLV "is going public," b/c the article is from last December.

I'd say you have an issue anytime AD's are going public with something as basic as revenue distribution---especially when the contract is only in its second year and has about a decade left to run. As long as we approached them as a group and offered all-sports memberships, I suspect we could get 5-6 teams to jump. Deregulation of divisional play would need to happen first. Then, this group of AAC presidents would have to become very bold and aggressive (pretty darn unlikely based on what we have seen thus far).

In the eyes of the playoff, all G5 conferences are the same... but in the long term scheme of things they are not. I have and will continue to strongly believe that the end game is to break off 75-80 teams and form an upper level above FBS and right now the AAC is the 6th conference. This is why I want to attempt to lure away a couple MWC teams and further weaken them.

and yes, the AAC was WIDELY known to be undervalued. This has been said by several analyst and repeated by our commisioner, who just so happens to be a long time TV veteran. The simple fact is the value of our individual teams was worth more then the conference... meaning, nobody knew who was staying or going, so they werent going to spend money on it.

Now that it is settled and we are performing pretty well, I can see us getting a bump. I have never said the TV contract will be $10 million. What I have said is that I believe our total revenue will get closer to the $10-12 million range. I think tripling our TV contract to about $6-7 million is feasable. Add in NCAA credits and Playoff money and were now almost at $10 million. Then I think the AAC can make a case for us to get a larger share of the Playoff money because we are the 6th conference... and so far the only one that has a BCS/Access bowl win AND an NCAA championship (in 2 sports).

The ACC will make about $25 million in 2019 (they are on an elevator system that increases each year but isnt maxed out) and I dont think its insane to think the AAC will be around half of that and the Clear cut leader at #6... which will put us in a good position to be included in the break away.

as much as people hate ESPN, I think its best we sign whatever deal they send us... or else amazingly enough realignment will happen again (shocking) and this conference will be plucked apart.

(05-10-2015 10:46 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  In the eyes of the playoff, all G5 conferences are the same... but in the long term scheme of things they are not. I have and will continue to strongly believe that the end game is to break off 75-80 teams and form an upper level above FBS and right now the AAC is the 6th conference. This is why I want to attempt to lure away a couple MWC teams and further weaken them.

and yes, the AAC was WIDELY known to be undervalued. This has been said by several analyst and repeated by our commisioner, who just so happens to be a long time TV veteran. The simple fact is the value of our individual teams was worth more then the conference... meaning, nobody knew who was staying or going, so they werent going to spend money on it.

Now that it is settled and we are performing pretty well, I can see us getting a bump. I have never said the TV contract will be $10 million. What I have said is that I believe our total revenue will get closer to the $10-12 million range. I think tripling our TV contract to about $6-7 million is feasable. Add in NCAA credits and Playoff money and were now almost at $10 million. Then I think the AAC can make a case for us to get a larger share of the Playoff money because we are the 6th conference... and so far the only one that has a BCS/Access bowl win AND an NCAA championship (in 2 sports).

The ACC will make about $25 million in 2019 (they are on an elevator system that increases each year but isnt maxed out) and I dont think its insane to think the AAC will be around half of that and the Clear cut leader at #6... which will put us in a good position to be included in the break away.

as much as people hate ESPN, I think its best we sign whatever deal they send us... or else amazingly enough realignment will happen again (shocking) and this conference will be plucked apart.

That's where I think the end game is as well (except I think it will end up being slightly in excess of your high end estimate---about 85-90 teams).

(05-10-2015 08:54 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  Espn has been actively in talks with the AAC about elevating the conf.

link?

(05-10-2015 11:03 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-10-2015 10:46 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  In the eyes of the playoff, all G5 conferences are the same... but in the long term scheme of things they are not. I have and will continue to strongly believe that the end game is to break off 75-80 teams and form an upper level above FBS and right now the AAC is the 6th conference. This is why I want to attempt to lure away a couple MWC teams and further weaken them.

and yes, the AAC was WIDELY known to be undervalued. This has been said by several analyst and repeated by our commisioner, who just so happens to be a long time TV veteran. The simple fact is the value of our individual teams was worth more then the conference... meaning, nobody knew who was staying or going, so they werent going to spend money on it.

Now that it is settled and we are performing pretty well, I can see us getting a bump. I have never said the TV contract will be $10 million. What I have said is that I believe our total revenue will get closer to the $10-12 million range. I think tripling our TV contract to about $6-7 million is feasable. Add in NCAA credits and Playoff money and were now almost at $10 million. Then I think the AAC can make a case for us to get a larger share of the Playoff money because we are the 6th conference... and so far the only one that has a BCS/Access bowl win AND an NCAA championship (in 2 sports).

The ACC will make about $25 million in 2019 (they are on an elevator system that increases each year but isnt maxed out) and I dont think its insane to think the AAC will be around half of that and the Clear cut leader at #6... which will put us in a good position to be included in the break away.

as much as people hate ESPN, I think its best we sign whatever deal they send us... or else amazingly enough realignment will happen again (shocking) and this conference will be plucked apart.

That's where I think the end game is as well (except I think it will end up being slightly in excess of your high end estimate---about 85-90 teams).

My supposition is that the PAC 12 finally gets their 4 teams from the Big 12.... and I tend to believe that Notre Dame finally joins the ACC, who will invite Uconn. At that point you have two 16 team conferences, two 14 team conferences. Thats 60.... and then theres the leftover 6 from the Big 12.
I tend to believe the Big 12 will add 10 teams from mostly the AAC and BYU. That gets you to 76. If you think about the 10 teams that could get added, once you get past them you start going down in quality. There will be some that are left out at have a very good argument to get in and I tend to think that the tie breaker will be market. (thats why I love being in Tampa)

I just cant see another 14 teams beyond that... but it could be. They may make a "best of the rest" conference. The MWC has 12 and we have 12.... if you add 10 teams to the Big 12, then you have 14 leftover. So in your scenario essentially everyone in the MWC and AAC would make it into that new division....well, except 1 since BYU will be included.

I just dont think teams like USU, SJSU and Wyoming bring much to the table and geographically if you remove them, then the "best of the rest" conference gets REAL spread out.

given, this is all specualtion but its about the only fun we get to have for the next few months... but I tend to think 76 teams is about where it will end.