(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
Ehhh. I don't think it's any big harbinger of things to come. As you pointed out, it's simply a resetting of the value that reflects a rebuilt CUSA membership (just like what happened to the Big East/AAC in 2013--which was way before anyone was worrying about cord cutting). All the G5's went through significant changes in the last realignment scramble---CUSA and the Big East/AAC were the two hardest hit in by the last wave of conference movement. The AAC, MAC, and MW already had to negotiate deals with thier current new membership. The Sunbelt is still under thier old long term deal. CUSA was just the last one with a massive membership change to negotiate their new contract. People on here keep saying that CUSA was the first G5 to renew under these "new" conditions. No---they are the LAST of the massively rebuilt G5's to renew.
Outside of the Big East/AAC, CUSA was the G5 with the most change. The Big East/AAC went from 3.1 million per team in the last year of their old ESPN deal to about 2 million per team---a 33% hair cut for the new AAC ESPN deal signed in early 2013. The reality is the cut in value was even worse than it sounds, because the Big East turned down an early extension in April of 2012 that would have paid each of its all-sports members about 10 million a year. That's an 80% loss of value for legacy teams like UConn and Cinci.
Now that the base values have been established for these essentially new G5 leagues, the conferences that go out and build thier programs, fill,thier stadiums, and post solid ratings will likely see solid contract increases down the road. By then, I imagine the sports networks will be well on thier way to figuring out a new model that can monetize live sports rights in a environment where streaming and cable tv are both equally acceptable methods of consuming media content in the home. Hell, by then, it may be better for conferences to sell thier games direct to consumers through a digital network, eliminating the ESPN middle man, and gobbling up that advertising and pay for play income themselves. That's the real long term threat to ESPN---not cord cutting.
I have to agree. We filled up with SBC teams that held no TV values in the 'belt and thought by simply changing the conference sticker on the back of helmets we would be fine.
I do see the other G5's getting a trim too but nothing close to the haircut we are about to take.
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
I will repeat this again.....
TV dollars are not the only money a conference can get you. Even if the CUSA contract is lowered by 75% the below spreadsheet shows schools in CUSA still make millions more than SBC school . And while the chart doesn't show it the MAC is mostly in the 3 million range on Rights and Licensing fees. Western has almost doubled their amount since leaving the SBC. Take away $700,000 from the figures and it's still 1.3 million more
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
I will repeat this again.....
TV dollars are not the only money a conference can get you. Even if the CUSA contract is lowered by 75% the below spreadsheet shows schools in CUSA still make millions more than SBC school . And while the chart doesn't show it the MAC is mostly in the 3 million range on Rights and Licensing fees. Western has almost doubled their amount since leaving the SBC. Take away $700,000 from the figures and it's still 1.3 million more
Thing is, licensing deals have almost nothing to do with conference alignment. They have a lot more to do with the performance of the program in question. For instance, AState has nearly tripled our licensing sales in the last 8 years, and we've never left the Sun Belt in that time. We got the bump because we started winning and changed mascots to boot. We wouldn't necessarilly see a bump by simply switching leagues because we've already experienced a tremendous bump recently without leaving the current league.
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
I will repeat this again.....
TV dollars are not the only money a conference can get you. Even if the CUSA contract is lowered by 75% the below spreadsheet shows schools in CUSA still make millions more than SBC school . And while the chart doesn't show it the MAC is mostly in the 3 million range on Rights and Licensing fees. Western has almost doubled their amount since leaving the SBC. Take away $700,000 from the figures and it's still 1.3 million more
Thing is, licensing deals have almost nothing to do with conference alignment. They have a lot more to do with the performance of the program in question. For instance, AState has nearly tripled our licensing sales in the last 8 years, and we've never left the Sun Belt in that time. We got the bump because we started winning and changed mascots to boot. We wouldn't necessarilly see a bump by simply switching leagues because we've already experienced a tremendous bump recently without leaving the current league.
If you say so....
last time I checked UTEP had 1 winning season out of the last 10
Last time I checked UNT had 1 winning season since joining CUSA
Last time I checked FAU hasn't had a winning season in CUSA
Last time I checked MUTS had 8 wins their last season in the SBC and haven't passes those in CUSA ...yet 3 million more in licensing
So if you say it's all about winning and nothing to do with conference...
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
"This is a lousy time to negotiate a TV deal, because cable networks have no idea what their future holds. This is why they are paying top dollar for can’t-miss rights and very little for the rights of leagues and events that have limited fanbases."
(This post was last modified: 05-05-2016 07:34 PM by WesternBlazer.)
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
I will repeat this again.....
TV dollars are not the only money a conference can get you. Even if the CUSA contract is lowered by 75% the below spreadsheet shows schools in CUSA still make millions more than SBC school . And while the chart doesn't show it the MAC is mostly in the 3 million range on Rights and Licensing fees. Western has almost doubled their amount since leaving the SBC. Take away $700,000 from the figures and it's still 1.3 million more
Thing is, licensing deals have almost nothing to do with conference alignment. They have a lot more to do with the performance of the program in question. For instance, AState has nearly tripled our licensing sales in the last 8 years, and we've never left the Sun Belt in that time. We got the bump because we started winning and changed mascots to boot. We wouldn't necessarilly see a bump by simply switching leagues because we've already experienced a tremendous bump recently without leaving the current league.
If you say so....
last time I checked UTEP had 1 winning season out of the last 10
Last time I checked UNT had 1 winning season since joining CUSA
Last time I checked FAU hasn't had a winning season in CUSA
Last time I checked MUTS had 8 wins their last season in the SBC and haven't passes those in CUSA ...yet 3 million more in licensing
So if you say it's all about winning and nothing to do with conference...
OK
But that doesn't mean a Sun Belt School moving now would experience the same effect.
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
No. Belt is last. By a long way.
Yeah, even if we're only getting $300,000 per school, that's still double what the SBC teams get.
It's an irrelevant amount of money regardless though. Let's just hope the exposure helps us win some recruiting battles and put a better product on the field.
(05-04-2016 04:47 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote: So basically the conference will get less money with more exposure compared to more money with less exposure under the current deal. Now it's up to the current schools to make the best of it. You'll make less but you can sell your program to recruits by being on TV.
Before any AAC, MAC and SBC fans come here to celebrate and lecture us how "better off" they are, remember, this is not good for the rest of the G5 in future TV negotiations. There's already a precedent for this since the last realignment of 2011-14. The AAC went first when they got relegated to the kids table and lost their TV deal and bowls they had when they were called the Big East, then the MWC lost its tv network and its 3 most important football schools, got a so so deal with Boise State getting the lion's share, the MAC got stuck with ESPN making peanuts for a long term deal, now it's C-USA's turn to take a cut in TV money after the defectors left and the Sun Belt is well the Sun Belt.
Unless your school is in a P5 conference, this is not good for any of the G5.
If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
No. Belt is last. By a long way.
Yeah, even if we're only getting $300,000 per school, that's still double what the SBC teams get.
It's an irrelevant amount of money regardless though. Let's just hope the exposure helps us win some recruiting battles and put a better product on the field.
$300,000 would be triple what the SBC gets per team but it's not enough to really matter.
You're forgetting the bowl payouts per team. The SBC finished ahead of CUSA last season. You also need to count the basketball units - we've had a team in the round of 32 two years in a row now...that's MILLIONS of bucks for the conference. PS: I was rooting for the MUTS to go to the Sweet 16 this year too.
The reason the Belt is in such a sweet spot for the near future is obviously due to the 10-team business model.
(This post was last modified: 05-06-2016 11:48 AM by airtroop.)
(05-06-2016 10:18 AM)Niner National Wrote: Ah, I thought I saw someone say they got $150,000 per team.
The way I understand the TV deal is it's $1.5 mil per year ($125,000 per team currently) but will go up to $150,000 per team after the 2017-18 season. I'm pretty sure the TV deal will end in 2020.
(05-06-2016 11:47 AM)airtroop Wrote: You're forgetting the bowl payouts per team. The SBC finished ahead of CUSA last season. You also need to count the basketball units - we've had a team in the round of 32 two years in a row now...that's MILLIONS of bucks for the conference. PS: I was rooting for the MUTS to go to the Sweet 16 this year too.
The reason the Belt is in such a sweet spot for the near future is obviously due to the 10-team business model.
It is a discussion about TV dollars, are they wrong about the belt's TV revenue?
(05-05-2016 04:03 PM)airtroop Wrote: If the CUSA TV deal rumors are true, the SBC will become the number two highest paying G5 conference per school, right after the AAC. I'll take it.
I will repeat this again.....
TV dollars are not the only money a conference can get you. Even if the CUSA contract is lowered by 75% the below spreadsheet shows schools in CUSA still make millions more than SBC school . And while the chart doesn't show it the MAC is mostly in the 3 million range on Rights and Licensing fees. Western has almost doubled their amount since leaving the SBC. Take away $700,000 from the figures and it's still 1.3 million more
Thing is, licensing deals have almost nothing to do with conference alignment. They have a lot more to do with the performance of the program in question. For instance, AState has nearly tripled our licensing sales in the last 8 years, and we've never left the Sun Belt in that time. We got the bump because we started winning and changed mascots to boot. We wouldn't necessarilly see a bump by simply switching leagues because we've already experienced a tremendous bump recently without leaving the current league.
If you say so....
last time I checked UTEP had 1 winning season out of the last 10
Last time I checked UNT had 1 winning season since joining CUSA
Last time I checked FAU hasn't had a winning season in CUSA
Last time I checked MUTS had 8 wins their last season in the SBC and haven't passes those in CUSA ...yet 3 million more in licensing
So if you say it's all about winning and nothing to do with conference...
OK
But that doesn't mean a Sun Belt School moving now would experience the same effect.
![[Image: RIGHTS%20MONEY_zpst4hetupr.jpg]](http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f117/wkuyoungguns/RIGHTS%20MONEY_zpst4hetupr.jpg)
![[Image: EmfOiPZ.gif?1]](http://i.imgur.com/EmfOiPZ.gif?1)