http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/p...032/SPORTS

That's good, I'm happy for the WAC. They deserve it. For all the talk of the MWC the WAC has done more on the national scene then them. Good for them!

I too am very happy for the WAC. They deserve a better deal. Actually, I think they deserve an even better deal than this, but you have to give it to the leaders of that league for remaining patient . They recieve alot of exposure as it is. That is a great league at the top.

cuseroc Wrote:I too am very happy for the WAC. They deserve a better deal. Actually, I think they deserve an even better deal than this, but you have to give it to the leaders of that league for remaining patient . They recieve alot of exposure as it is. That is a great league at the top.

I agree. That article brought up a great point, the WAC thought they deserved the MWC's old ESPN deal, of 6 years 48 million I believe. I agree, because the WAC has done a great job filling in for the MWC.

this has got to be a stab in the eye to the MWC, lost in their TV netherland as they are...

wvucrazed Wrote:this has got to be a stab in the eye to the MWC, lost in their TV netherland as they are...

I don't think so. The MWC has different goals with respect to game times and television than the WAC does.

The WAC was seeking something similar to the MWC's deal in 1999 and they still got only 2/3rds of that in 2008. They'll get more weeknight football games (possibly without extra inconvenience fees as the MAC will stop receiving them this year). The extra basketball will be nice since they will likely take back the late Big Monday slot that the WCC has had the past two years (The WCC is switching back to a Thursday-Saturday scheduling rotation). The WAC only had two regular season games on ESPN, it won't be hard to to improve on that. I want to see if they'll get any games on ABC. That would be a true improvement for the conference.

The MWC fan in their region can see their games on their three outlets (Versus, CSTV and the mtn.). They've got their $12 million per year from those entities. CBS is considering airing games next year from the conference and wanted a game or two this year, but the logistics could not be worked out. They have game times that they are able to dictate to maximize the ticket sales (I'm pretty sure some teams has seen increases in attendance since leaving ESPN). They have a high revenue stream guaranteed and can focus on getting the fan revenue. For example, Utah has already hit a high in season ticket sales of ~26,700 with about 45 days until the season starts.

Both conferences have different goals and ways to go about them. The WAC feels the need to do that through ESPN exposure to keep the conference in the public eye. The MWC feels that their schools have been a known quantity in their regions for some time and want to grow their base.

Its a business philosophy decision and I think both have their pluses and minuses. I'm curious to see the final release from both parties about the new deal. The MAC (2010), Sun Belt (2008) and C-USA (2011) will all be renegotiating in the next few years. Some C-USA teams are already balking at the non-Saturday games, going the MWC route. Their negotiation will be the interesting one since they are already split between two networks for football & basketball (ESPN/ESPN2 and CBS College Sports).

The problem with the MWC's goal is that their fans may be able to see their games in their regions but nobody else will be able to see their games and that will hurt their national presence and really hurt recruiting. There is no way that CBS is going to broadcast more then one or two of their games and with so many other games being broadcasts MWC games that are shown will be quickly forgotten.

CatsClaw Wrote:The problem with the MWC's goal is that their fans may be able to see their games in their regions but nobody else will be able to see their games and that will hurt their national presence and really hurt recruiting. There is no way that CBS is going to broadcast more then one or two of their games and with so many other games being broadcasts MWC games that are shown will be quickly forgotten.

I don't agree that it hurts recruiting seeing as MWC schools pretty much recruit the MWC region. Texas to California, the only schools that really recruit out of that area consistantly is Air Force who has a national profile and Wyoming who recruits the upper midwest (Iowa, Nebraska, Illinois, ect..). I actually think now that the MTN is available nationwide on DirectTV it is a thing that the MWC can use as a selling point because parents can watch almost all of their kids games on TV if they subscribe to the right TV package. The MTN is not really meant as a outlet for the casual football fan to see the MWC, it is really meant for people who want to see our games to see them. Versus and CBS college sports provide the more mainstream coverage and get the better games, but I will agree that this does not provide the profile that ESPN provides. The MWC was faced with a choice of playing on weekdays (non-Thursday weekday games were the real problem) on ESPN or playing mostly on Saturdays with a few Thursday games on Versus, CBSCS, and the MTN. In the end the presidents and ADs did what they thought was best and I think they made the right choice.

Ultimatilely the MWC did get a bit lucky in the fact that CBS bought CSTV because they are pushing CBSCS into more homes than CSTV was in and it opens up the possibility of a MWC game or two on the main CBS station. Versus going out and getting Pac 10 and Big 12 games also helped because it is starting to become a station that people expect to find college football on, like TBS was before they dropped football.

mattsarz Wrote:

wvucrazed Wrote:this has got to be a stab in the eye to the MWC, lost in their TV netherland as they are...

I don't think so. The MWC has different goals with respect to game times and television than the WAC does.


For example, Utah has already hit a high in season ticket sales of ~26,700 with about 45 days until the season starts.

That's pretty incredible considering Utah's home schedule this year.

Sat, Aug 30 at (18) Michigan 3:30 pm --
Sat, Sep 6 UNLV 8:00 pm --
Sat, Sep 13 at Utah State 8:00 pm --
Sat, Sep 20 at Air Force 4:00 pm --
Sat, Sep 27 Weber State 8:00 pm --
Thu, Oct 2 (25) Oregon State 9:00 pm --
Sat, Oct 11 at Wyoming 2:00 pm --
Sat, Oct 18 Colorado State 2:00 pm --
Sat, Nov 1 at New Mexico 9:30 pm --
Thu, Nov 6 TCU 8:00 pm --
Sat, Nov 15 at San Diego State 8:00 pm --
Sat, Nov 22 (14) Brigham Young 6:00 pm --

tcufrog86 Wrote:

CatsClaw Wrote:The problem with the MWC's goal is that their fans may be able to see their games in their regions but nobody else will be able to see their games and that will hurt their national presence and really hurt recruiting. There is no way that CBS is going to broadcast more then one or two of their games and with so many other games being broadcasts MWC games that are shown will be quickly forgotten.

I don't agree that it hurts recruiting seeing as MWC schools pretty much recruit the MWC region. Texas to California, the only schools that really recruit out of that area consistantly is Air Force who has a national profile and Wyoming who recruits the upper midwest (Iowa, Nebraska, Illinois, ect..). I actually think now that the MTN is available nationwide on DirectTV it is a thing that the MWC can use as a selling point because parents can watch almost all of their kids games on TV if they subscribe to the right TV package. The MTN is not really meant as a outlet for the casual football fan to see the MWC, it is really meant for people who want to see our games to see them. Versus and CBS college sports provide the more mainstream coverage and get the better games, but I will agree that this does not provide the profile that ESPN provides. The MWC was faced with a choice of playing on weekdays (non-Thursday weekday games were the real problem) on ESPN or playing mostly on Saturdays with a few Thursday games on Versus, CBSCS, and the MTN. In the end the presidents and ADs did what they thought was best and I think they made the right choice.

Ultimatilely the MWC did get a bit lucky in the fact that CBS bought CSTV because they are pushing CBSCS into more homes than CSTV was in and it opens up the possibility of a MWC game or two on the main CBS station. Versus going out and getting Pac 10 and Big 12 games also helped because it is starting to become a station that people expect to find college football on, like TBS was before they dropped football.

That part that I highlighted is the main reason I think that the MWC will have issues. Television deals aren't meant to bringing in hardcore fans, those fans will come anyway. It's meant to get exposure to casual fans and fans of other conferences. Your television deal needs to sell your program to casual fans and, as a result recruits. Why sell it to people who already have it? That's the equivalent of going to Alaska and trying to sell ice to Eskimoes. Why sell it to people who already have it?

But the point is that the MTN is not the only outlet. TCU has 10 games that fall under the MWC contract as either a TCU home game or a TCU game at another MWC home stadium. Out of those 10 games, 3 will be on Versus, 3 will be on the MTN, and 3 on CBSCS. So only 3 of TCUs game are on the network that is primarily for the already hard core MWC fans. Most people get Versus on their TV package and more and more people get CBSCS. The 1 non televised game under the MWC contract is a TCU home game against 1-aa Stephen F. Austin.

Then TCU @ SMU will be on CBSCS and TCU @ Oklahoma will most likely be on FSN.

So out of TCUs 12 games 11 will be on TV that is available nationwide if you really want to get it, 8 of those will be on TV stations that a decent number of people have. That is better exposure than the majority of non-BCS teams receive. The exceptions are those such as Boise State who are willing to play everyday of the week like TCU did when they were in C-USA. The vast majority of WAC teams do not receive any exposure, the average MWC team receives much more. A team like Nevada for example only has 1 TV game listed on their schedule which is a ESPN 2 game @ Fresno State. It is not listed on their schedule, but I think their game @ UNLV is also on the MTN. So they have 2 of 12 games televised.

mattsarz Wrote:For example, Utah has already hit a high in season ticket sales of ~26,700 with about 45 days until the season starts.

Matt,
Are you sure about this number? That seems awfully low for a state school that's had the success Utah has had recently.
CJ

TIGER-PAUL Wrote:http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/p...032/SPORTS

I was a paper boy for the Advertiser, when I was a kid!