(02-08-2019 05:11 PM)quo vadis Wrote: The AAC could sign a deal like the SEC has with CBS, whereby the network would get their choice of one AAC game each week. So the AAC wouldn't have to make up a schedule in advance that involves guessing about who is going to be good or not.
The problem with that is the value of the top game doesn't change, whether it is a stand alone package, or part of a comprehensive package. However the value of the secondary games, when not tied to the top game, ie very devalued by a split package.
(02-09-2019 01:09 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: [quote='33laszlo99' pid='15893533' dateline='1549683364']
[quote='Attackcoog' pid='15893453' dateline='1549680794']
Of course the problem with this view is it ignores past history. NBC bid on the AAC in 2013—losing out to ESPN when ESPN exercised its right to match clause. They had also tried for the Pac12 rights losing out when Fox-ESPN joined forces to outbid NBC. It also ignores that the AAC viewer numbers are significantly higher than the other G5 ratings.
It was not ESPN who exercised that option: it was the American. ESPN did use their contractional right to match the offer, but it was the Amercian who chose to use that right to rescind their signed contract with NBC and instead resign with ESPN. Big difference. It was the choice of the American to take that offer, not ESPN's choice. They were not restricted free agents.
(02-09-2019 11:11 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: Here's another reason why NBC would be a good partner for T1 rights. NBC like the ND package because it gets them broad coverage accross the country. The AAC provides a similar broad blanket with a northeast presence, a Florida presence, a southern presence, a Texas presence, and a service academy with fans nationwide.
You may be stretching the "Northeast" presence, as the entire Northeast footprint is UConn (Temple is not really "northeast" and rather in the shawdows of other bigger names in Philly at the moment), and the others are still often second and third tier within their footprint right now.
(02-09-2019 12:09 PM)AllTideUp Wrote: The AAC was lowballed by NBC after the whole fiasco with the Big East turning down a decent contract from ESPN. And NBC knew they were lowballing the AAC because I'm sure Aresco went to the execs and asked them to do better than ESPN. It didn't work.
not really. At the time, NBC was one of only two other options on the table, the other of which was actually a more lucrative offer (per Aresco) with a partner not named. But they chose NBC due to timeslot guarantees. Although it always troubled me that they had to take less money to get more timeslots: usually it is the other way around. ESPn, fresh off jettisoning some excess SEC games as a result of expansion, and moving some PAC 12 an dBig 12 games to Fox, combined with "turning on" ESPN News, now had some extra time slots, and along with careful wording to allow CBS Sports Net to replace NBC Sports in the contract, now had the timeslots to match (ESPN originally offered much more than NBC, but were going to put the games we now see on CBS Sports and ESPN News on ESPN3 and syndication.
With SEC no longer in the syndication business and the ACC soon to leave it next year, the best way to get more money from ESPN is to allow them to take Tier 3 games and instead of placing on CBS Sports, allow them to be syndicated again, which will likely pay more money, AND result in more exposure within each teams' own market, as games will be on the primary local RSN - usually on basic cable - as opposed to ESPN News or CBS Sports, or NBC Sports.
S