So says the Cincinnati Enquirer. I hope this guy knows what he is talking about:

A new Mid-American Conference television contract will help, providing about $1 million to each member after this year.


http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130...ck_check=1

EDIT: maybe he means the new CFP money?
.

(09-15-2013 12:38 PM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  So says the Cincinnati Enquirer. I hope this guy knows what he is talking about:

A new Mid-American Conference television contract will help, providing about $1 million to each member after this year.


http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130...ck_check=1

EDIT: maybe he means the new CFP money?
.

Interesting. I too think I'd heard the est. of a possible $1M per school if the CFP does as well as expected.

Wouldn't it be amazing if MAC schools could pocket $1M from the CFP and $1M from ESPN per year.

I'll be skeptical of the television number until I see it confirmed somewhere else.

I can remember in the mid-90s where the MAC got 0 dollars from television and pennies from the Las Vegas bowl.

(for those young ones, in the mid-90s, MAC had to pay production expenses for games so technically their television income was a negative - it was an expense rather than an income).

Thanks for sharing this. I can't believe there is but one comment on this topic yet a thread dedicated to the marching 100 has an ongoing conversation.

This is big news as it puts us on equal footing with the other G5 conferences.

It's huge news if they author meant one million per school and not 1 million for the conference. Most of us are a little afraid to get excited.

It may have meant $1MM over the lifetime of the TV contract deal....don't see how it can be annual.

The times have changed. TV is where programs make the biggest $. Numbers like thus help rationalize the crazy conference shifts going on....

(09-16-2013 10:29 AM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  It may have meant $1MM over the lifetime of the TV contract deal....don't see how it can be annual.

I don't know what makes sense?

Normally one could take the last contract and 'inflate' it by say 25 or 50% and go with that number.

But, 150% of a small number is still a small number.

Quite frankly, I have NO IDEA how the television market plays out today because of all of the changes in the college sports industry.

I believe ESPN rewards us based on the perceived value of our sports to their network.

Things which affect it could be a BCS bid (i.e., NIU), loss of other conferences to other networks, etc.

If ESPN says "we have more and more open slots we need MAC games to fill some of those slots' then the value goes up significant, a higher demand for our games.

We'll see..

(09-16-2013 01:41 PM)emu steve Wrote:  I don't know what makes sense?

Normally one could take the last contract and 'inflate' it by say 25 or 50% and go with that number.

But, 150% of a small number is still a small number.

The thing is that in the existing contract, the MAC seemed to have traded away some dollar value in return for exposure.

The value of live sports programming to advertisers has increased dramatically in the past five years, due to the impact of DVR'ing shows and skipping ads. The last MAC contract may not have factored all of that in, because there was less competition for their rights.

And the MAC continues to be willing to play weeknights to get on the higher exposure channels, while other higher profile ESPN partner conferences may balk at mid-week football, creating greater need in the ESPN inventory for mid-week games from the MAC.

And looking ahead, FS1 could well be in competition for the MAC rights if it goes to market, for similar reasons.

So it could be that the market value has gone up two to four times.

And of course, a large share of the media value of MAC in the current contract may have been taken in guaranteed exposure rather than dollars. Supposing that was 50:50 in value taken through exposure guarantees rather than dollar payment ~ if the value of the rights doubled, and they stood pat on exposure guarantees and took all of that increase in value in dollars, that would be four times the dollar value. If the value of the rights quadrupled, and they stood pat on exposure guarantees and took all of that increase in value in dollars, that would be eight times the dollar value.

That's back of the envelope, but that's one way that the dollar value of the media rights could plausibly rise from the low $100,000's to $1m.

I guess I don't see how it could NOT be $1 million/school.

My point of reference is CUSA, which, after all the defections and entrance of Sun Belt and 1AA schools, is making that much per school. Their TV partner had the opportunity to renegotiate after the defections, but did not, which implies that is the going rate.

Add to this the fact that the WAC is dead (less supply), FS1 has started (more demand), and MACtion has become popular (better product = more advertising revenue) and I am not the least bit shocked at $1 million per school.

(09-16-2013 02:56 PM)IULurker Wrote:  My point of reference is CUSA, which, after all the defections and entrance of Sun Belt and 1AA schools, is making that much per school. Their TV partner had the opportunity to renegotiate after the defections, but did not, which implies that is the going rate.

No necessarily, Cusa only had 1 or 2 years left on their deal. The savings may not have been worth the effort. It cost money to negotiate deals.

That being said I expect the Mac will get a raise in the end. While CUSA will at best stay flat, and maybe even go down next time. I imagine 4 of the 5 gang conf will be within 300k of each other, while the ACC will remain 1 mil ahead.

1 mil per school isn't a lot of money.

(09-17-2013 09:17 AM)Cougar King Wrote:  1 mil per school isn't a lot of money.

speak for yourself, it is a lot of money for MAC schools.

(09-17-2013 09:17 AM)Cougar King Wrote:  1 mil per school isn't a lot of money.

When you're making $300,000 per school, it is. I think we could do a little better, but a 333% increase from 300k is still nothing to sneeze at (especially when our costs are comparatively low because of short travel).

(09-17-2013 10:08 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(09-17-2013 09:17 AM)Cougar King Wrote:  1 mil per school isn't a lot of money.

When you're making $300,000 per school, it is. I think we could do a little better, but a 333% increase from 300k is still nothing to sneeze at (especially when our costs are comparatively low because of short travel).

and who says we are now at 300K per school.

I thought it was closer to 100K.

As I assume all know, MAC schools get 3 nice big outside sources of FB funds:

1). Those games vs. big schools who typically pay between 500K to 1M to our MAC schools.

2). Hoped for 1M /year / school from the College Football Playoff, a successor to the BCS.

3). Our ESPN television rights discussed here. Hopefully 1M / year / school.

I assume most MAC teams would like 3M / year from these sources.

3M isn't chump change as 'outside' income.

(09-17-2013 10:01 AM)cmufanatic Wrote:  

(09-17-2013 09:17 AM)Cougar King Wrote:  1 mil per school isn't a lot of money.

speak for yourself, it is a lot of money for MAC schools.

For most mac schools that would bump their budget by less than 5% for the top spending schools in the conference it's way closer to 3%

(09-17-2013 11:21 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(09-17-2013 10:08 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(09-17-2013 09:17 AM)Cougar King Wrote:  1 mil per school isn't a lot of money.

When you're making $300,000 per school, it is. I think we could do a little better, but a 333% increase from 300k is still nothing to sneeze at (especially when our costs are comparatively low because of short travel).

and who says we are now at 300K per school.

I thought it was closer to 100K.

As I assume all know, MAC schools get 3 nice big outside sources of FB funds:

1). Those games vs. big schools who typically pay between 500K to 1M to our MAC schools.

2). Hoped for 1M /year / school from the College Football Playoff, a successor to the BCS.

3). Our ESPN television rights discussed here. Hopefully 1M / year / school.

I assume most MAC teams would like 3M / year from these sources.

3M isn't chump change as 'outside' income.

My bad, it is closer to 100k (confused our TV deal with the WAC's old one). In that case, it's closer to an increase of 1000 percent...

Agree on your other points as well. When you factor in basketball and the new TV deal for Miami/WMU hockey it's quite a bit of money when you add it all up. Certainly looks to be an improvement over what we've had in the past, yet we've been able to stretch our dollar pretty far.

(09-17-2013 12:55 PM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(09-17-2013 11:21 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(09-17-2013 10:08 AM)Love and Honor Wrote:  

(09-17-2013 09:17 AM)Cougar King Wrote:  1 mil per school isn't a lot of money.

When you're making $300,000 per school, it is. I think we could do a little better, but a 333% increase from 300k is still nothing to sneeze at (especially when our costs are comparatively low because of short travel).

and who says we are now at 300K per school.

I thought it was closer to 100K.

As I assume all know, MAC schools get 3 nice big outside sources of FB funds:

1). Those games vs. big schools who typically pay between 500K to 1M to our MAC schools.

2). Hoped for 1M /year / school from the College Football Playoff, a successor to the BCS.

3). Our ESPN television rights discussed here. Hopefully 1M / year / school.

I assume most MAC teams would like 3M / year from these sources.

3M isn't chump change as 'outside' income.

My bad, it is closer to 100k (confused our TV deal with the WAC's old one). In that case, it's closer to an increase of 1000 percent...

Agree on your other points as well. When you factor in basketball and the new TV deal for Miami/WMU hockey it's quite a bit of money when you add it all up. Certainly looks to be an improvement over what we've had in the past, yet we've been able to stretch our dollar pretty far.

FWIW, I believe EMU uses those big paydays from playing teams like PSU and Rutgers for 'capital' type projects.

Those monies do not go into the department's general operating fund budget.

I don't know what EMU will do (or has done with BCS monies) with CFP monies or television rights monies.

An extra $1,000,000 per school per year is actually a lot when it doesn't immediately go to cover travel expenses from playing in a conference that's scattered all over the country.

(09-17-2013 02:09 PM)uakronkid Wrote:  An extra $1,000,000 per school per year is actually a lot when it doesn't immediately go to cover travel expenses from playing in a conference that's scattered all over the country.

Here is an article written by a very knowledgeable EMU follower:

http://eagletotem.net/blog/2013/06/20/th...orts/5781/

EMU lists the FB budget at 2.47M. I'm pretty sure that does not count scholarship costs. (I believe the athletic department has a $9M budget, without charge-backs for athletic scholarships).

The article notes that EMU doesn't count those FB 'guarantee games' as part of the department's operating income.

Now, if EMU can get $1M from college FB playoffs + 1M from ESPN (mostly because of FB) then those two sources pretty well cover the direct costs for the FB program.

************
EMU will get 1.55M from PSU, Rutgers & Army. Assume 1M from a new television deal + 1M from CFP and EMU FB produces more income than direct expenses... (see below):
**********

"It’s probably worth noting, however, that although the football program’s $2.47 million budget is the largest piece of the athletic department pie, that sport represents an even bigger slice of the income. The department expects $1.68 million in revenue, mostly from football and men’s basketball, with an $1.55 million of income outside the operating budget coming from the football away games at Penn State, Rutgers, and Army."

(09-17-2013 01:49 PM)emu steve Wrote:  I don't know what EMU will do (or has done with BCS monies) with CFP monies or television rights monies.

If I were you guys, priority number one would be to blow the 1992 renovation up to smithereens. You don't need to shrink down to the size of the Kibbie Dome, but removing 8,000 useless seats would really improve the facility. I hear that your press box/suite building is pretty bad too, that could fit in somewhere.