(12-08-2015 11:34 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 11:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 11:16 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 04:50 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  This is why I keep saying the AAC needs to move while the iron is hot.
I would look into going to 14-16 meaning even if the Big12 expanded we would still have 12-14 teams.
I would offer AF/ CSU to come on board

How are we going to pay these schools? I like the schools but don't see how it benefits to divide up our small TV dollars even smaller.

It's called a renegotiation.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

With what leverage?

Unless you think that Fox, CBS or NBC are going to give us enough of a financial incentive to give up,all the great coverage ESPN has given us.

To make matters worse, I don't see ESPN giving us a significant bump the way they are losing subscribers / revenues.

Hope I'm wrong but I don't see it happening, b/c it's not like we would be adding major markets to make it worthwhile.

Our only leverage will be a guranteed exclusive with them and they get that by singing us early. Our contract is up in 2019, so negotiations will begin in 2018. 3 years isnt a ton of time in this game.

What we NEED is for Houston to pull this off. If they win, that gives the AAC two access bowl wins over P5 teams. Thats when we approach Air Force and CSU to join. We talk to our tv partners about expanding our contract to accomodate them at the current rate.
ESPN already is paying both of them money in the MWC, so shifting it around doesnt hurt them.

I think the key to pulling any of this off is Houston winning AND then another team going to the Access bowl again next year. Hopefully USF does it, but if any team can then we can go back to our tv partners and ask for an early renegotiation without us going to open market. Our contract is so small that even with losses I doubt that ESPN blinks. They could pay all of us $6 million a year and its still less than they are paying for one major Bowl game.

You may also see ESPN consolidate. Lets say they move CSU and Air Force over to us in 2 years at current rate. Doesnt cost them a thing.
The AAC wins two more access bowls during that time, solidifying us as the premier G5. At that time, they help move Boise St and BYU into our conference, which will up our profile. They offer us something stupid like $6 million a year in 2018 to sign an early extension.
Well take it cause our choices are limited and they are helping move key pieces into our conference.

In 2019 the bowl cycle starts over and each bowl will be bidding on who they want. At that point we push for ESPN to put our champ (if not in the playoff) or our #2 into a better bowl against a higher profile team.

We wont get the Orange, Fiesta, Peach or any of that, but we may be able to get something like the Liberty vs the #4 Sec/Big 12/Big 10 or ACC. Maybe we can get a gurnateed payout in the $6-8 million range.

Is it pathetic in comparison.. yep. But if between a tv contract of $6 million, increased bowl payouts to the tune of $3-4 million, plus playoff money... we could all be looking at total revenue over $10 million. That doesnt make us rich, but it moves us in a direction of having enough funds to keep our coaches and assistants and building up to a point where we constantly can beat P5 teams. Then maybe in 2025 when the playoff is renegotiated we can move into the big kids table.
Its a long ways away but were currently a long way from being looked at as an equal and I think these steps are the way to get there.

(12-10-2015 12:05 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 11:34 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 11:28 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 11:16 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(12-08-2015 04:50 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  This is why I keep saying the AAC needs to move while the iron is hot.
I would look into going to 14-16 meaning even if the Big12 expanded we would still have 12-14 teams.
I would offer AF/ CSU to come on board

How are we going to pay these schools? I like the schools but don't see how it benefits to divide up our small TV dollars even smaller.

It's called a renegotiation.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

With what leverage?

Unless you think that Fox, CBS or NBC are going to give us enough of a financial incentive to give up,all the great coverage ESPN has given us.

To make matters worse, I don't see ESPN giving us a significant bump the way they are losing subscribers / revenues.

Hope I'm wrong but I don't see it happening, b/c it's not like we would be adding major markets to make it worthwhile.

Our only leverage will be a guranteed exclusive with them and they get that by singing us early. Our contract is up in 2019, so negotiations will begin in 2018. 3 years isnt a ton of time in this game.

What we NEED is for Houston to pull this off. If they win, that gives the AAC two access bowl wins over P5 teams. Thats when we approach Air Force and CSU to join. We talk to our tv partners about expanding our contract to accomodate them at the current rate.
ESPN already is paying both of them money in the MWC, so shifting it around doesnt hurt them.

I think the key to pulling any of this off is Houston winning AND then another team going to the Access bowl again next year. Hopefully USF does it, but if any team can then we can go back to our tv partners and ask for an early renegotiation without us going to open market. Our contract is so small that even with losses I doubt that ESPN blinks. They could pay all of us $6 million a year and its still less than they are paying for one major Bowl game.

You may also see ESPN consolidate. Lets say they move CSU and Air Force over to us in 2 years at current rate. Doesnt cost them a thing.
The AAC wins two more access bowls during that time, solidifying us as the premier G5. At that time, they help move Boise St and BYU into our conference, which will up our profile. They offer us something stupid like $6 million a year in 2018 to sign an early extension.
Well take it cause our choices are limited and they are helping move key pieces into our conference.

In 2019 the bowl cycle starts over and each bowl will be bidding on who they want. At that point we push for ESPN to put our champ (if not in the playoff) or our #2 into a better bowl against a higher profile team.

We wont get the Orange, Fiesta, Peach or any of that, but we may be able to get something like the Liberty vs the #4 Sec/Big 12/Big 10 or ACC. Maybe we can get a gurnateed payout in the $6-8 million range.

Is it pathetic in comparison.. yep. But if between a tv contract of $6 million, increased bowl payouts to the tune of $3-4 million, plus playoff money... we could all be looking at total revenue over $10 million. That doesnt make us rich, but it moves us in a direction of having enough funds to keep our coaches and assistants and building up to a point where we constantly can beat P5 teams. Then maybe in 2025 when the playoff is renegotiated we can move into the big kids table.
Its a long ways away but were currently a long way from being looked at as an equal and I think these steps are the way to get there.

That's a reasonable outcome. The only thing I might do if I were Aresco is tie the extension to a significant bump in the rights fee for the Miami Beach Bowl so it can upgrade its payout and become a player for attracting a solid P5 opponent. Maybe enlist ESPN's help in getting it in the same bowl pool as the Liberty, Texas, and Gator Bowls.

(12-10-2015 11:44 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If we want to elevate the conference, there is only one way---Build our fan bases so we have an average attendance approaching 40K a game. That creates a audience that simply becomes to large to ignore. Its too attractive to the networks and is large enough to support inclusion in major bowls.

Until then, there are things we can do to increase TV interest in our product. One is to obviously win the G5 slot at often as possible (I see major support for that in the AAC's financial commitment to hiring and retaining top coaching).

The second thing we can do is upgrade the Miami Beach Bowl to a upper mid-tier bowl (similar to the Liberty, Gator, Texas, or Music City Bowl) with a solid opponent (a #3-5 selection from a P5---could be a rotating selection or part of a bowl pool). Having a guaranteed major bowl destination against a P5 power for the AAC champ will give the AAC championship race additional significance which will help to drive TV ratings.

The third thing we can do to improve our standing while we build our fan bases is to add members where it can help us. If we get the opportunity to add Air Force, BYU, or Army---we should. If we get the opportunity to add a swath of the better MW schools (say something more geographically viable like Air Force, Colorado St, New Mexico and SDSU)---we should definitely consider it. That said, we need to be careful who we add does not adversely affect our goal of approaching an average attendance of 40K. AF wouldn't hurt too bad, New Mexico can do 40Kish when they are good. Colorado St is a concern---but a new stadium might help turn that around.

We should also consider smaller moves that improve the conference's basketball profile (Wichita or VCU-- adding both would be great). Its likely we will lose a couple of members at some point, so expanding to 14 or 16 now doesn't bother me. It just solidifies the leagues future as the dominant G5 on the college landscape and allows the league to withstand poaching. The one rule in expansion is the strong are the aggressors. The time to expand is when a conference is strong and rising. Your hand is never better than at that point. Your hand becomes much weaker after losing members to poaching. So, now is the time to consider making moves.

Agree with all your points except the Miami Beach Bowl. No one is going to take a game played at a baseball stadium seriously. We should focus on building the Military or the Cure Bowl into a legitimate bowl, or try to get the Armed Forces or the Liberty full-time.

(12-10-2015 01:23 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 11:44 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If we want to elevate the conference, there is only one way---Build our fan bases so we have an average attendance approaching 40K a game. That creates a audience that simply becomes to large to ignore. Its too attractive to the networks and is large enough to support inclusion in major bowls.

Until then, there are things we can do to increase TV interest in our product. One is to obviously win the G5 slot at often as possible (I see major support for that in the AAC's financial commitment to hiring and retaining top coaching).

The second thing we can do is upgrade the Miami Beach Bowl to a upper mid-tier bowl (similar to the Liberty, Gator, Texas, or Music City Bowl) with a solid opponent (a #3-5 selection from a P5---could be a rotating selection or part of a bowl pool). Having a guaranteed major bowl destination against a P5 power for the AAC champ will give the AAC championship race additional significance which will help to drive TV ratings.

The third thing we can do to improve our standing while we build our fan bases is to add members where it can help us. If we get the opportunity to add Air Force, BYU, or Army---we should. If we get the opportunity to add a swath of the better MW schools (say something more geographically viable like Air Force, Colorado St, New Mexico and SDSU)---we should definitely consider it. That said, we need to be careful who we add does not adversely affect our goal of approaching an average attendance of 40K. AF wouldn't hurt too bad, New Mexico can do 40Kish when they are good. Colorado St is a concern---but a new stadium might help turn that around.

We should also consider smaller moves that improve the conference's basketball profile (Wichita or VCU-- adding both would be great). Its likely we will lose a couple of members at some point, so expanding to 14 or 16 now doesn't bother me. It just solidifies the leagues future as the dominant G5 on the college landscape and allows the league to withstand poaching. The one rule in expansion is the strong are the aggressors. The time to expand is when a conference is strong and rising. Your hand is never better than at that point. Your hand becomes much weaker after losing members to poaching. So, now is the time to consider making moves.

Agree with all your points except the Miami Beach Bowl. No one is going to take a game played at a baseball stadium seriously. We should focus on building the Military or the Cure Bowl into a legitimate bowl, or try to get the Armed Forces or the Liberty full-time.

We own the bowl, the stadium is just the venue. I'd prefer we move it to a member stadium so we have complete control over the bowl. We wouldn't want to get snaked like we did with the Pinstripe. By the way, the Pinstripe is in a baseball stadium and it is fairly close to the level of bowl I'd like to see us achieve with the Miami Bowl (that said, I agree a football stadium would be better).

I just wish we hadnt lost the Memphis Liberty Bowl. Kinda shocked since we have a team there. Its one of the older bowls, so I like the idea of that being our major bowl, but I dont think it will ever happen.


My expectations are reasonable for the future and I am hoping that our current commisioner is aggressive in some expansion to set us apart from the rest. Were doing very well but go ahead and cripple the MWC while were hot. Then look for that early renewal with hopefully enough money in it to entice BYU. If we can get to 16 with CSU, Air Force and BYU.... I dont even care who the 16th is.... but its gonna take a TV contract of no less than $6 million, which I think is reasonable. Add in NCAA monies and playoff/bowl money and were making nearly $10 million a year. Thats more than what BYU is making and it may be enough to get them to come our way, which would go a long way for our case of being similar to the P5.

(12-10-2015 11:44 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If we want to elevate the conference, there is only one way---Build our fan bases so we have an average attendance approaching 40K a game. That creates a audience that simply becomes to large to ignore. Its too attractive to the networks and is large enough to support inclusion in major bowls.

The second thing we can do is upgrade the Miami Beach Bowl to a upper mid-tier bowl (similar to the Liberty, Gator, Texas, or Music City Bowl) with a solid opponent (a #3-5 selection from a P5---could be a rotating selection or part of a bowl pool). Having a guaranteed major bowl destination against a P5 power for the AAC champ will give the AAC championship race additional significance which will help to drive TV ratings.

The third thing we can do to improve our standing while we build our fan bases is to add members where it can help us. If we get the opportunity to add Air Force, BYU, or Army---we should. If we get the opportunity to add a swath of the better MW schools (say something more geographically viable like Air Force, Colorado St, New Mexico and SDSU)---we should definitely consider it. That said, we need to be careful who we add does not adversely affect our goal of approaching an average attendance of 40K. AF wouldn't hurt too bad, New Mexico can do 40Kish when they are good. Colorado St is a concern---but a new stadium might help turn that around.

An affiliation with BYU and Army would help the AAC with attendance, ratings, and the bowl lineup.

Attendance
Recent BYU road games at Houston, UConn, and UCF and Army games against UConn and Tulane illustrate the point:

- 2013 BYU @ Houston game (33K) had about the same attendance as Houston v. Rice and 10-15K better attendance than Houston's 2013 home games against SMU, Cincinnati, Memphis, USF.

- 2014 BYU @ UConn game (35K) had 8-12K better attendance than UConn's 2014 home games against Temple, UCF, Cincy, and SMU - and 5K better than Boise St. @ UConn.

- 2014 Army v. UConn in NYC (27K) was equal to Temple @ UConn and better than Cincy and SMU at UConn.

- 2015 Army @ UConn (28K) was better than UConn's home attendance versus Houston and ECU.

- 2014 BYU @ UCF game (41K) had 5-10K better attendance than UCF's 2014 home games against Temple, Tulane, Tulsa, and SMU...and about 5K better attendance than the UCF-USF in Tampa.

- 2015 Army @ Tulane (31K) had 5-10K better attendance than Tulane=s 2015 home games against Tulsa, UConn, Houston, UCF, and Duke.

And, FWIW, attendance at each of BYU's recent home games against UCF, Houston, and Cincinnati were 64K sell outs. ECU game was 60K and UConn game was 56K.

Ratings
Last year, the top TV ratings for non-P5 matchups included:

#1 Army-Navy (#1 almost every year)
#2 Boise St.-UConn
#3 Air Force-Army
#4 UConn-USF
#5 Fresno-Boise St.
#6 Fresno-Boise St. (MWC championship)
#7 BYU-UCF
#8 Houston-Cincinnati
#9 Utah St.-BYU
#10 UConn-BYU
#11 UCF-ECU
#12 Houston-BYU
#13 Fresno-New Mexico
#14 BYU-Boise St.
#15 UCF-Houston

This year, we are likely to see Army-Navy at #1 again. Also, Cincinnati and UConn @ BYU were in the top-5 of non-P5 broadcasts (These broadcasts are currently #1 and #3, but without Army-Navy game or ratings reported yet for Navy-Houston or AAC Championship).

#1 Army-Navy (likely)
#2 AAC Championship (likely)
#3 Houston-Navy (likely -on ABC)
#4 BYU-Cincinnati
#5 Cincinnati-Memphis
#6 BYU-UConn
#7Memphis-Tulsa
#8 Memphis-USF
#9 Temple-SMU
#10 NIU-BGSU (MAC Championship)
#11 BYU-Boise St.
#12 Boise St.-Air Force
#13 Toledo-NIU
#14 Memphis-Houston
#15 Temple-ECU

Bowl Lineup
To have BYU and Army available for bowl selection, AAC could improve its bowl lineup. I firmly believe the AAC/BYU/Army affiliation would land - Armed Forces Bowl versus a B1G/Big 12 opponent; Las Vegas Bowl versus PAC 12 opponent; and Poinsettia Bowl versus MWC (or PAC 12 opponent). [Las Vegas Bowl loves BYU, but would need a solid conference option. Each of BYU, Army, and Navy have had or will have their own contracts directly with the Poinsettia Bowl. Armed Forces Bowl would love to have Navy, Army, and AAC West schools available].

I also think the AAC would have a shot at bumping its way into either the Liberty or Texas bowl within the next 2-3 years.

While this absolutely benefits BYU and Army, it also adds TWO or THREE bowls against P5 opponents that can be touted as part of the AAC bowl lineup. It would likely be similar to the ND/ACC and PAC 12 bowl selection procedures, where a team can be selected for a bowl as long as their win-loss record is within one win of highest available team.

Here's what the AAC bowl lineup could look like with the BYU/Army affiliation:

Champion: NY6 (BYU/Army ineligible]

Tier 1
Liberty/Texas (v. SEC/B12)
Military (v. ACC)
Las Vegas (v. PAC 12)

Tier 2
Birmingham (v. SEC)
St. Petersburg (v. ACC/CUSA)
Armed Forces (v. B1G/B12)

Tier 3
Poinsettia (v. MWC)
Boca Raton (v. MAC)
Miami Beach (v. CUSA)
Cure (v. Sun Belt)

(12-10-2015 01:26 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 01:23 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(12-10-2015 11:44 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If we want to elevate the conference, there is only one way---Build our fan bases so we have an average attendance approaching 40K a game. That creates a audience that simply becomes to large to ignore. Its too attractive to the networks and is large enough to support inclusion in major bowls.

Until then, there are things we can do to increase TV interest in our product. One is to obviously win the G5 slot at often as possible (I see major support for that in the AAC's financial commitment to hiring and retaining top coaching).

The second thing we can do is upgrade the Miami Beach Bowl to a upper mid-tier bowl (similar to the Liberty, Gator, Texas, or Music City Bowl) with a solid opponent (a #3-5 selection from a P5---could be a rotating selection or part of a bowl pool). Having a guaranteed major bowl destination against a P5 power for the AAC champ will give the AAC championship race additional significance which will help to drive TV ratings.

The third thing we can do to improve our standing while we build our fan bases is to add members where it can help us. If we get the opportunity to add Air Force, BYU, or Army---we should. If we get the opportunity to add a swath of the better MW schools (say something more geographically viable like Air Force, Colorado St, New Mexico and SDSU)---we should definitely consider it. That said, we need to be careful who we add does not adversely affect our goal of approaching an average attendance of 40K. AF wouldn't hurt too bad, New Mexico can do 40Kish when they are good. Colorado St is a concern---but a new stadium might help turn that around.

We should also consider smaller moves that improve the conference's basketball profile (Wichita or VCU-- adding both would be great). Its likely we will lose a couple of members at some point, so expanding to 14 or 16 now doesn't bother me. It just solidifies the leagues future as the dominant G5 on the college landscape and allows the league to withstand poaching. The one rule in expansion is the strong are the aggressors. The time to expand is when a conference is strong and rising. Your hand is never better than at that point. Your hand becomes much weaker after losing members to poaching. So, now is the time to consider making moves.

Agree with all your points except the Miami Beach Bowl. No one is going to take a game played at a baseball stadium seriously. We should focus on building the Military or the Cure Bowl into a legitimate bowl, or try to get the Armed Forces or the Liberty full-time.

We own the bowl, the stadium is just the venue. I'd prefer we move it to a member stadium so we have complete control over the bowl. We wouldn't want to get snaked like we did with the Pinstripe. By the way, the Pinstripe is in a baseball stadium and it is fairly close to the level of bowl I'd like to see us achieve with the Miami Bowl (that said, I agree a football stadium would be better).

What a disaster that game is. Weekday afternoons in a baseball stadium...need to move it out of Miami and to Tampa, Orlando, or Jax. Or even Atlanta. Surely Atlanta can deal with a second bowl game with the Peach Bowl now in the CFP?

2019 is a HUGE year for the AAC. Not only are we negotiating a new contract but its also when Bowls are going to be negotiated. I truly think there is a chance that we can negotiate back into having a few better bowls.

Some of these bowls went after having more ACC and Big 12 affiliations and then realized that the #6,7,8 teams in this conference dont have fans that travel at all. It would be a good move for them to come lock in the AAC #2 or #3 instead.

For example, the Liberty Bowl pays $1.4 million and they got Kansas St and Arkansas. Neither fanbase is pumped about this bowl at all and ticket sales arent going that great. They got a mid level Big 12 and a bottom feeder SEC.... If they pumped up the payment a bit, they could get the #2/3 AAC team every year. Heart of Texas bowl is another we should go after.

Are they BIG payments... no, but Id like to see us get more Million plus bowls and let the G4 schools take these Sub $500Ks that we have.

Id like to see us get a full tie to the Armed Forces Bowl, a full tie to the Heart of Dalas Bowl, upgrade the Miami Bowl to be included in the same bowll pool with Liberty and Gator. I'd also like to see us dump the Hawaii Bowl and pick a full tie to the NOLA bowl (fun destination for a low end bowl against a G5!champ.

News flash. BYU isn't in a P5 conference despite their history. The fact that they aren't should send up red flags in the back of everyone's mind.

Adding BYU isn't going to make this conference a Power conference but, it will expand out footprint and travel costs. So adding them without having an increased contract signed and in hand is just poor business to me.

Eyeball interest is definitely there for the AAC, I would be shocked if this league's tv $$$ deal doesn't improve soon.

(12-12-2015 10:28 AM)Mestophalies Wrote:  News flash. BYU isn't in a P5 conference despite their history. The fact that they aren't should send up red flags in the back of everyone's mind.

Adding BYU isn't going to make this conference a Power conference but, it will expand out footprint and travel costs. So adding them without having an increased contract signed and in hand is just poor business to me.

Granted, ByU is not in a P5 conference, but they have all the ingredients. They are commonly withing the top 25. They regularly fill their 55000 seat stadium. They have a national following that gets the ratings. They would be an addition that immediately adds to the pie.

(12-12-2015 11:14 AM)rosewater Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 10:28 AM)Mestophalies Wrote:  News flash. BYU isn't in a P5 conference despite their history. The fact that they aren't should send up red flags in the back of everyone's mind.

Adding BYU isn't going to make this conference a Power conference but, it will expand out footprint and travel costs. So adding them without having an increased contract signed and in hand is just poor business to me.

Granted, ByU is not in a P5 conference, but they have all the ingredients. They are commonly withing the top 25. They regularly fill their 55000 seat stadium. They have a national following that gets the ratings. They would be an addition that immediately adds to the pie.

You have to ask yourself, does our media "partner", ESPN, really want to see a more valuable ACC (for example, by adding BYU)? Or do they want us to remain the good ol' economy product on their shelf?

ESPN will have enough trouble paying/renewing their existing P5 contracts. It may very well be the case that they like the AAC just as it is, and might secretly be against any moves that might mean a bigger payout.

If this is the case, then Aresco will need to decide whether he wants to continue selling dried spaghetti, on sale, at $0.65 a box, or whether he needs to be a "growth/risk" CEO and create something more compelling for the COMPETITORS of ESPN.

(12-12-2015 12:37 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 11:14 AM)rosewater Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 10:28 AM)Mestophalies Wrote:  News flash. BYU isn't in a P5 conference despite their history. The fact that they aren't should send up red flags in the back of everyone's mind.

Adding BYU isn't going to make this conference a Power conference but, it will expand out footprint and travel costs. So adding them without having an increased contract signed and in hand is just poor business to me.

Granted, ByU is not in a P5 conference, but they have all the ingredients. They are commonly withing the top 25. They regularly fill their 55000 seat stadium. They have a national following that gets the ratings. They would be an addition that immediately adds to the pie.

You have to ask yourself, does our media "partner", ESPN, really want to see a more valuable ACC (for example, by adding BYU)? Or do they want us to remain the good ol' economy product on their shelf?

ESPN will have enough trouble paying/renewing their existing P5 contracts. It may very well be the case that they like the AAC just as it is, and might secretly be against any moves that might mean a bigger payout.

If this is the case, then Aresco will need to decide whether he wants to continue selling dried spaghetti, on sale, at $0.65 a box, or whether he needs to be a "growth/risk" CEO and create something more compelling for the COMPETITORS of ESPN.

A lot could be riding on the B1G media contract negotiations.

If ESPN loses significant B1G inventory, ESPN's very next move may be to help the AAC add the pieces that will enhance the AAC - so ESPN can build inventory to replace the B1G loss.

If ESPN keeps significant B1G inventory, ESPN may have little room or resources to even renew the current AAC deal in 2019. In that instance, FOX may be the driver towards AAC expansion.

(12-12-2015 12:45 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 12:37 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 11:14 AM)rosewater Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 10:28 AM)Mestophalies Wrote:  News flash. BYU isn't in a P5 conference despite their history. The fact that they aren't should send up red flags in the back of everyone's mind.

Adding BYU isn't going to make this conference a Power conference but, it will expand out footprint and travel costs. So adding them without having an increased contract signed and in hand is just poor business to me.

Granted, ByU is not in a P5 conference, but they have all the ingredients. They are commonly withing the top 25. They regularly fill their 55000 seat stadium. They have a national following that gets the ratings. They would be an addition that immediately adds to the pie.

You have to ask yourself, does our media "partner", ESPN, really want to see a more valuable ACC (for example, by adding BYU)? Or do they want us to remain the good ol' economy product on their shelf?

ESPN will have enough trouble paying/renewing their existing P5 contracts. It may very well be the case that they like the AAC just as it is, and might secretly be against any moves that might mean a bigger payout.

If this is the case, then Aresco will need to decide whether he wants to continue selling dried spaghetti, on sale, at $0.65 a box, or whether he needs to be a "growth/risk" CEO and create something more compelling for the COMPETITORS of ESPN.

A lot could be riding on the B1G media contract negotiations.

If ESPN loses significant B1G inventory, ESPN's very next move may be to help the AAC add the pieces that will enhance the AAC - so ESPN can build inventory to replace the B1G loss.

If ESPN keeps significant B1G inventory, ESPN may have little room or resources to even renew the current AAC deal in 2019. In that instance, FOX may be the driver towards AAC expansion.

Good points. Seems like a tough call for Aresco: Be proactive with expansion or lay back until the next set of TV renewals and let the networks advise at that time (with the risk that other conferences may decide to maneuver in the interim).

(12-12-2015 12:45 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 12:37 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 11:14 AM)rosewater Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 10:28 AM)Mestophalies Wrote:  News flash. BYU isn't in a P5 conference despite their history. The fact that they aren't should send up red flags in the back of everyone's mind.

Adding BYU isn't going to make this conference a Power conference but, it will expand out footprint and travel costs. So adding them without having an increased contract signed and in hand is just poor business to me.

Granted, ByU is not in a P5 conference, but they have all the ingredients. They are commonly withing the top 25. They regularly fill their 55000 seat stadium. They have a national following that gets the ratings. They would be an addition that immediately adds to the pie.

You have to ask yourself, does our media "partner", ESPN, really want to see a more valuable ACC (for example, by adding BYU)? Or do they want us to remain the good ol' economy product on their shelf?

ESPN will have enough trouble paying/renewing their existing P5 contracts. It may very well be the case that they like the AAC just as it is, and might secretly be against any moves that might mean a bigger payout.

If this is the case, then Aresco will need to decide whether he wants to continue selling dried spaghetti, on sale, at $0.65 a box, or whether he needs to be a "growth/risk" CEO and create something more compelling for the COMPETITORS of ESPN.

A lot could be riding on the B1G media contract negotiations.

If ESPN loses significant B1G inventory, ESPN's very next move may be to help the AAC add the pieces that will enhance the AAC - so ESPN can build inventory to replace the B1G loss.

If ESPN keeps significant B1G inventory, ESPN may have little room or resources to even renew the current AAC deal in 2019. In that instance, FOX may be the driver towards AAC expansion.

Supposedly Fox is a virtual shoe in to get at least half the new B1G contract. That would leave ESPN with half of the B1G inventory minus the stuff reserved for the BTN. That makes us fairly important to ESPNs future football schedules. That said, if we increase our value via program development and expansion, we could become an attractive and economical cornerstone FBS product for NBC. Say we continue performing well and add 4 key western MW schools to become the country's only nationwide conference, that's a pretty solid anchor conference to pair with Notre Dame football to make a real move into FBS football by the Peacock network. I doubt ESPN wants that.

That's said, an unintended consequence of losing half the B1G inventory might be that ESPN pushes for Big12 or ACC expansion to increase thier P5 inventory.

(12-12-2015 12:56 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Supposedly Fox is a virtual shoe in to get at least half the new B1G contract. That would leave ESPN with half of the B1G inventory not wasn't to the BTN. That makes us fairly important to ESPNs future football schedules. That said, if we increase our value via program development and expansion, we could become an attractive and economical cornerstone FBS product for NBC. Say we continue performing well and add 4 key western MW schools to become the country's only nationwide conference, that's a pretty solid anchor conference to pair with Notre Dame football to make a real move into FBS football by the Peacock network. I doubt ESPN wants that.

I would not commit to that until I had a signed, announced and delivered copy of that contract in hand. Just say'in.

(12-12-2015 10:54 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  Eyeball interest is definitely there for the AAC, I would be shocked if this league's tv $$$ deal doesn't improve soon.

I recommend that you plant several lightning rods around yourself to prepare for a massive shock.

(12-12-2015 08:50 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 10:54 AM)BigHouston Wrote:  Eyeball interest is definitely there for the AAC, I would be shocked if this league's tv $$$ deal doesn't improve soon.

I recommend that you plant several lightning rods around yourself to prepare for a massive shock.

I dont think he will be shocked but the current contract does have 4 more years.... but I SERIOUSLY doubt that ESPN lets it go to open market. They will approach us within 3 years to get this done.
This is why I want to expand NOW. Its us, MWC and BYU in 2019 getting new deals. I have no problem sucker punching the MWC and taking two of their higher profile teams in order to give us more inventory to sell within a good market, while damaging our closest competition.

If we make the MWC even more undesirable, then we will be the only thing worth bidding on for the next 6 years. I think you would see all the four major sports channels get real interested quick.

Honestly what we need is for ESPN to get shut out. My dream scenario is that Fox gets the half everyone is expecting and then NBC comes in and shells out some cash to take the rest. Ive always wondered why they didnt bid harder on us and I think it may have been strategic. They were saving their money for the real prize. They want to feature Notre Dame and Big 10 on their network each week.

If it happens, then i can see ESPN actually investing in us to make us a better product.

Why would ESPN give the AAC more money? They dont have too. Our one chip (small as it is) is exposure. ESPN gives us that. We arent going anywhere that will give us better exposure and ESPN knows it. So the conteact will stay the same.