Someone please enlighten me as to why this was ever negotiated and how it held up despite the defections of over half the league and 8? new members (e.g. wouldn't all the defections allowed the AAC to end all previous contractual obligations)?

That clause cost this league millions in my opinion and was just absurd. The AAC is certainly not in the P5 category right now but that contract, especially as compared to the new BE deal, is too cheap IMO based on the value of live sports and potential for this league. Hell this entire league gets about as an individual SEC school. Not to mention, apparently ESPN had the right to match but Aresco played some role in reducing the length, so why did the AAC have a right to decide on length but not to negotiate the terms? This issue will continue to really hurt the AAC as it leaves our teams so far behind the P5 at such a critical time.

Aresco was given a tough hand but I think he made some major mistakes along the way. His one big selling point was his media background and all that has led to is this talking point of "exposure" but only after getting low balled badly, now we have ESPN eliminating some coverage of the league online. I just want to understand why and how this all went down as it did. Thanks.

And, does the new contract have the same clause?

Apparently it was a standard clause in ESPN's contract. CUSA's contract with ESPN had the clause, but they flat out violated it and ESPN took them to court. In the end CUSA got the contract they wanted, but had to allow ESPN to have the CCG.

The American could have signed with NBC, but in the end they made the right decision and signed with ESPN.

(07-10-2013 11:00 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Apparently it was a standard clause in ESPN's contract. CUSA's contract with ESPN had the clause, but they flat out violated it and ESPN took them to court. In the end CUSA got the contract they wanted, but had to allow ESPN to have the CCG.

The American could have signed with NBC, but in the end they made the right decision and signed with ESPN.

A contract is a contract. No clause is standard unless both parties agree to it. Basically, if it wasn't in the new NBC contract, it's not in the ESPN contract. My guess is that this is the type of clause that gets worked into a contract when it is signed as an early renewal or extension. In those cases, the conference is in a little weaker position and is not on the open market. That might be how it happened originally. But it is a clause that certainly limited the AAC.

(07-10-2013 11:00 AM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Apparently it was a standard clause in ESPN's contract. CUSA's contract with ESPN had the clause, but they flat out violated it and ESPN took them to court. In the end CUSA got the contract they wanted, but had to allow ESPN to have the CCG.

The American could have signed with NBC, but in the end they made the right decision and signed with ESPN.

Stiil not sure if ESPN is/was the right decision... I guess, we will soon (14) find that out, wouldn't we.

(07-10-2013 10:55 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Someone please enlighten me as to why this was ever negotiated and how it held up despite the defections of over half the league and 8? new members (e.g. wouldn't all the defections allowed the AAC to end all previous contractual obligations)?

It was negotiated presumably because ESPN wanted it and they gave us something in return to get it. Although with our negotiators you never know.

It held up because despite all the defections, the core NCAA-recognized institutional conference entity never ceased to exist. The Big East never dissolved itself. And hey, that isn't completely a bad thing, it's why we will have AQ status in the BCS this year.

(07-10-2013 11:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 10:55 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Someone please enlighten me as to why this was ever negotiated and how it held up despite the defections of over half the league and 8? new members (e.g. wouldn't all the defections allowed the AAC to end all previous contractual obligations)?

It was negotiated presumably because ESPN wanted it and they gave us something in return to get it. Although with our negotiators you never know.

It held up because despite all the defections, the core NCAA-recognized institutional conference entity never ceased to exist. The Big East never dissolved itself. And hey, that isn't completely a bad thing, it's why we will have AQ status in the BCS this year.

....and that slot is most likely going to a team that is leaving, though some of the cash gets spread across the AAC I believe. When only 3 of the original what 16 teams remain I find it hard to believe the court would uphold the language. The C7 gets far more than the AAC for Bball only, it's a joke IMO and a major albatross for the league members. The old BE was significantly behind the P5 conferences, what now? We can only hope that our member schools dip into their reserves to build this conference and re-negotiate in a few years. As you can tell I am less than optimistic.

It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal.

Relax. Jeez.

Had the Big East simply let all the football schools go, it would have been saddled with the terms of the ESPN contract re: right of first refusal. By forming a new corporate entity, they could pursue the Fox deal independently and make a lot more as a result.

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Had the Big East simply let all the football schools go, it would have been saddled with the terms of the ESPN contract re: right of first refusal. By forming a new corporate entity, they could pursue the Fox deal independently and make a lot more as a result.

This is something I've always wondered, could ESPN have actually made an attempt to enforce the right to match on the C7? I don't personally think they would have had any urge at the price Fox paid to do it, but I think an interesting legal argument could have been made that it shouldn't have absolved them from the debts/liabilities that were with the Big East, because as the C7 has always said they didn't leave and that it was a divorce.

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal.

Relax. Jeez.

You should not be at all relaxed, this deal will kill any chance that this league has to being considered a power conference. With every passing year we will fall further behind the P5 and all the rhetoric of "just win to get respect" is useless, the money gap is astronomical and most of our schools are already behind when it comes to ticket/stadium revenue. We are slowly being pushed out. Uncertainty (IMO) only plays into the length not the terms as ESPN could always work in optionality based on further defections. They either place little to no value in this league (again league payouts lower than B10 and SEC team payouts) or the negotiation was botched badly. The BE took all their Bball credits but we get stuck with the contract language, makes perfect sense and exactly what a strong leader would accept. This is not a fight for relevancy as a league, it's only a fight for a few B12 spots and perhaps 1 ACC slot, the league is what it is IMO. Sorry but that's the hard truth, I hope I am wrong. It already began with the blog getting cut, just an early indicator. The saving grace for this TU fan, it's certainly is a better situation then the CBelt and may have saved our athletic program.

BTW what are the options for the year3 renegotiation? First I heard of that.

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal...

I though the C7 signed with Fox, not NBC.

Regardless, if our contract with ESPN has a renegotiation opener at the halfway point, no most favored nation renewal clause going forward, and good broadcast exposure obligations, then I agree that Aresco did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. I think people forget that the negotiation coincided, unfortunately, with the height of chaos for this league. He did much better than the old group in Providence would have done under the same circumstances.

(07-10-2013 12:51 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal...

I though the C7 signed with Fox, not NBC.

Regardless, if our contract with ESPN has a renegotiation opener at the halfway point, no most favored nation renewal clause going forward, and good broadcast exposure obligations, then I agree that Aresco did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. I think people forget that the negotiation coincided, unfortunately, with the height of chaos for this league. He did much better than the old group in Providence would have done under the same circumstances.

Really, I guess I think that it would be nearly impossible to do any worse, financially for sure and exposure wise Aresco really did nothing but follow the contract and allow ESPN to match a horrendous offer. He got a shat offer from NBC (obviously couldn't convince them of the value) and literally got saved by ESPN matching so he could claim exposure. How can you consider ESPN matching a crap offer (negotiated by Aresco) as doing "well" as a commish? It really frustrates me that he has gotton a pass, the money gap is huge. Doing well would have been attacking the contract language as the original deal was negotiated by schools that are all gone, then using his super media skills to produce a bidding war. Seriously what has this guy accomplished?

Again, can someone provide a source for what can be renegotiated after 3 years.

IIRC the look-in/renegotiation wasn't so much a time-issued thing, but more or less when Navy's contract expires, which is after 2016 - the third year of the contract. Navy's inclusion in the TV deal is not something that was negotiated into the contract, I believe. Navy is on their own contract for 2015 and 2016.

(07-10-2013 12:56 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:51 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal...

I though the C7 signed with Fox, not NBC.

Regardless, if our contract with ESPN has a renegotiation opener at the halfway point, no most favored nation renewal clause going forward, and good broadcast exposure obligations, then I agree that Aresco did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. I think people forget that the negotiation coincided, unfortunately, with the height of chaos for this league. He did much better than the old group in Providence would have done under the same circumstances.

Really, I guess I think that it would be nearly impossible to do any worse, financially for sure and exposure wise Aresco really did nothing but follow the contract and allow ESPN to match a horrendous offer. He got a shat offer from NBC (obviously couldn't convince them of the value) and literally got saved by ESPN matching so he could claim exposure. How can you consider ESPN matching a crap offer (negotiated by Aresco) as doing "well" as a commish? It really frustrates me that he has gotton a pass, the money gap is huge. Doing well would have been attacking the contract language as the original deal was negotiated by schools that are all gone, then using his super media skills to produce a bidding war. Seriously what has this guy accomplished?

Again, can someone provide a source for what can be renegotiated after 3 years.

Aresco is selling an inferior product. The relatively poor quality of teams at the bottom of the league are a big part of that, and Tulane is the biggest culprit of all on that front. So I'm wondering why you are driving so fast in this direction.

We aren't even in the league yet (which we will be the weakest member of in terms of value-add) and we're complaining about a deal that was made years ago (probably when we were contemplating dropping football?).

That's a little rich.

(07-10-2013 12:51 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal...

I though the C7 signed with Fox, not NBC.

Regardless, if our contract with ESPN has a renegotiation opener at the halfway point, no most favored nation renewal clause going forward, and good broadcast exposure obligations, then I agree that Aresco did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. I think people forget that the negotiation coincided, unfortunately, with the height of chaos for this league. He did much better than the old group in Providence would have done under the same circumstances.

Yes, it was Fox. typo.

(07-10-2013 12:56 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:51 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal...

I though the C7 signed with Fox, not NBC.

Regardless, if our contract with ESPN has a renegotiation opener at the halfway point, no most favored nation renewal clause going forward, and good broadcast exposure obligations, then I agree that Aresco did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. I think people forget that the negotiation coincided, unfortunately, with the height of chaos for this league. He did much better than the old group in Providence would have done under the same circumstances.

Really, I guess I think that it would be nearly impossible to do any worse, financially for sure and exposure wise Aresco really did nothing but follow the contract and allow ESPN to match a horrendous offer. He got a shat offer from NBC (obviously couldn't convince them of the value) and literally got saved by ESPN matching so he could claim exposure.

He didn't get saved. The media contract is dreadful and everyone knows it. Nobody is fooled by Aresco's "exposure" talk.

(07-10-2013 12:08 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 11:16 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 10:55 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Someone please enlighten me as to why this was ever negotiated and how it held up despite the defections of over half the league and 8? new members (e.g. wouldn't all the defections allowed the AAC to end all previous contractual obligations)?

It was negotiated presumably because ESPN wanted it and they gave us something in return to get it. Although with our negotiators you never know.

It held up because despite all the defections, the core NCAA-recognized institutional conference entity never ceased to exist. The Big East never dissolved itself. And hey, that isn't completely a bad thing, it's why we will have AQ status in the BCS this year.

....and that slot is most likely going to a team that is leaving, though some of the cash gets spread across the AAC I believe.

All of the BCS bowl cash will be spread around the AAC, just like all other bowl revenue.

(07-10-2013 12:50 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal.

Relax. Jeez.

You should not be at all relaxed, this deal will kill any chance that this league has to being considered a power conference.

This league will never be a "Power Conference" in the true sense of the word. We don't have the political power they have. End of story.

(07-10-2013 12:50 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  With every passing year we will fall further behind the P5 and all the rhetoric of "just win to get respect" is useless, the money gap is astronomical and most of our schools are already behind when it comes to ticket/stadium revenue.

I HATE "Just win". The "just win" rhetoric is useless and it always was. See.... Colorado move to Pac12, Rutgers to Big10 and Cincy/UConn/Boise getting left behind. The moves are based on on the field performance, with maybe the exception of TCU and maybe Utah. Otherwise Boise would be in the Pac12.

Ticket sales aren't anybody else problem other than the individual schools and their fans in this conference. Tulane might be an acception here due to Katrina.

(07-10-2013 12:50 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  We are slowly being pushed out.

No TV deal would stop this from happening. The P5 want nothing to do with us for the most part.

(07-10-2013 12:50 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Uncertainty (IMO) only plays into the length not the terms as ESPN could always work in optionality based on further defections. They either place little to no value in this league (again league payouts lower than B10 and SEC team payouts) or the negotiation was botched badly. The BE took all their Bball credits but we get stuck with the contract language, makes perfect sense and exactly what a strong leader would accept. This is not a fight for relevancy as a league, it's only a fight for a few B12 spots and perhaps 1 ACC slot, the league is what it is IMO. Sorry but that's the hard truth, I hope I am wrong. It already began with the blog getting cut, just an early indicator. The saving grace for this TU fan, it's certainly is a better situation then the CBelt and may have saved our athletic program.

BTW what are the options for the year 3 renegotiation? First I heard of that.

Hard to disagree with most of this but I still don't believe there's much of anything that could've been done to get a better TV deal. We were essentially creating a new conference with a LOT of instability at the time. Plus, ESPN has the power, money and they know how to play hardball. I'm sure the "right of refusal" clause wasn't the old Big East leaders' idea.

To be blunt, most of the fanbases (ie, most interested TV viewers) in the AAC are very, very small in comparison to P5. We don't have many t-shirt / casual fans here.

I'm honestly not sure what you expected from a TV deal. Even in the most ideal situations I can't see this conference getting more than $10,000,000 / school / year. That's less than half of what the Power 5 are averaging. That number would roughly coincide with the average attendance figure comparisons (good indicator of fanbases) as well.

As far as I'm concerned it's every man (athletic program) for itself fighting and clawing for the next level, hoping on the field performance will be a bigger factor next round. There's a handful of slots left. If every program in this conference looks at things that way the AAC could be a really competitive league.

Look on the bright side. As a Tulane fan, you guys have a pretty big jump on the rest of us regarding academics, something that matters in realignment.

(07-10-2013 01:38 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:56 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:51 PM)Enriquillo Wrote:  

(07-10-2013 12:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  It's a 6 year deal with a renegotiation at the half way mark. Lots of uncertainty when the deal was cut to make things even worse. As far as the C7 go, they're about as stable as it gets b/c they don't have FBS football to destabilize their league. That, combined w/ the fact NBC desperately needed inventory is why they got such a good deal...

I though the C7 signed with Fox, not NBC.

Regardless, if our contract with ESPN has a renegotiation opener at the halfway point, no most favored nation renewal clause going forward, and good broadcast exposure obligations, then I agree that Aresco did as well as anyone could under the circumstances. I think people forget that the negotiation coincided, unfortunately, with the height of chaos for this league. He did much better than the old group in Providence would have done under the same circumstances.

Really, I guess I think that it would be nearly impossible to do any worse, financially for sure and exposure wise Aresco really did nothing but follow the contract and allow ESPN to match a horrendous offer. He got a shat offer from NBC (obviously couldn't convince them of the value) and literally got saved by ESPN matching so he could claim exposure. How can you consider ESPN matching a crap offer (negotiated by Aresco) as doing "well" as a commish? It really frustrates me that he has gotton a pass, the money gap is huge. Doing well would have been attacking the contract language as the original deal was negotiated by schools that are all gone, then using his super media skills to produce a bidding war. Seriously what has this guy accomplished?

Again, can someone provide a source for what can be renegotiated after 3 years.

Aresco is selling an inferior product. The relatively poor quality of teams at the bottom of the league are a big part of that, and Tulane is the biggest culprit of all on that front. So I'm wondering why you are driving so fast in this direction.

We aren't even in the league yet (which we will be the weakest member of in terms of value-add) and we're complaining about a deal that was made years ago (probably when we were contemplating dropping football?).

That's a little rich.

My TU fandom has nothing to do with the discussion, its not like I have been on any TU teams or ran our program to the current state, but I agree we are by far the weakest program and actually another reason why I say the following:

I guess my point is that as fans we need to be concerned about a leader that has no experience being the top guy, bowl situation remains a mystery/negative and the contract is a joke. He negotiates a contract with an entity and a few month's later they cancel online coverage, that's bush league. I agree this is an inferior product but live sports media rights are the most valuable asset in TV and we got hammered by a Bball only conference that has plenty of flawed teams as well and the gap with the P5 is gigantic, absolutely huge. He took in a flawed TU (thank god) without assurances from the C7 (I know it is questionable that they were going to bolt no matter what) but you add that up with all the other negatives and I think as fans we should really question his leadership. How can you not be crystal clear with your members during that process? Again, maybe he was not at fault but add that in with all the other negatives and one has to be a bit scared about the performance of our commish moving forward at this critical time. It's the off season and these questions are very important.

To me it makes zero sense to allow a term negotiated by other parties to dictate the value of your contract and if you do then you better dam well figure out other value drivers or a very early exit option. Now I hear the 3 year out stuff but nothing concrete, that would change my POV drastically. Maybe I am biased but I see more value in this AAC group than what was negotiated. He couldn't get more out of NBC?????

Flawed yes, but you and apparently others think he is doing his best to make lemonade out of lemons. I look around and wonder how all these Bball and FBall games with teams in decent markets with lots of potential and/or huge enrollments can be worth so much less than other negotiated deals, again maybe I overrate this flawed product. My other point, all in all this comes to the question of leadership and the sad reality that financially this conference is in a world of trouble (if of course you want to have us anywhere near the P5 conversation now or in the future). With every year the gap will widen considerably, again I hope I am wrong but normally money talks. I guess that is my third point, people need to forget about any conversation between the AAC and P5, it isn't happening IMO and the best we can do is fight off the MWC for (our teams?) any relevancy.