Rudd's comments in quotes. My response in bold italics.

"We're 24 months out from the renegotiation of the TV contract, and we are optimistic we will see a significant increase." Hope is not a strategy.

"Myself (Rudd) and SMU's Gerald Turner will be the two presidents working with Mike Aresco on the renegotiation of the TV contract and media rights." At least Compher won't be playing a major role.

"If we are able to get $8-10M per year per school -- or more -- that would be a significant improvement." Duh.

"Even though that may not match up with SEC money, any movement helps keep us competitive and allows us to stay in the top tier of universities." May not match up?

"Our number will increase entirely because we have a compelling product. If you look at viewership over the course of the last two years, our ratings have been competitive, and in some cases more competitive than some elements of the Big 12." You can thank your flagship Houston for that.

Would you be in favor of your school signing an 8 year grant of rights if it meant an average of $12M/yr from TV?

Where's the cutoff that you would/would not sign a GOR?

(08-05-2017 12:35 PM)tigerjamesc Wrote:  Would you be in favor of your school signing an 8 year grant of rights if it meant an average of $12M/yr from TV?

What would the number be without a signed GOR?

(08-05-2017 12:11 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Rudd's comments in quotes. My response in bold italics.

"We're 24 months out from the renegotiation of the TV contract, and we are optimistic we will see a significant increase." Hope is not a strategy.

"Myself (Rudd) and SMU's Gerald Turner will be the two presidents working with Mike Aresco on the renegotiation of the TV contract and media rights." At least Compher won't be playing a major role.

"If we are able to get $8-10M per year per school -- or more -- that would be a significant improvement." Duh.

"Even though that may not match up with SEC money, any movement helps keep us competitive and allows us to stay in the top tier of universities." May not match up?

"Our number will increase entirely because we have a compelling product. If you look at viewership over the course of the last two years, our ratings have been competitive, and in some cases more competitive than some elements of the Big 12." You can thank your flagship Houston for that.

In an interview this past week Compher said he's been appointed to work on the negotiations.

(08-04-2017 05:38 PM)STLWAVE Wrote:  ACC is lowest of p5 at 22. I'm assuming MWC is highest of the G4, what are they at again? $8-10M would cement AAC in a land of its own. I'd definitely take that.

I don't understand this number at all. Maybe it's on account of my ignorance of football money but... are you telling me that Northwestern of the B1G and K-Suck of the B12minus2 get more television revenue than UNC and Duke of the ACC? I simply cannot believe that.


T


...

(08-05-2017 12:43 PM)C0|db|00ded Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 05:38 PM)STLWAVE Wrote:  ACC is lowest of p5 at 22. I'm assuming MWC is highest of the G4, what are they at again? $8-10M would cement AAC in a land of its own. I'd definitely take that.

I don't understand this number at all. Maybe it's on account of my ignorance of football money but... are you telling me that Northwestern of the B1G and K-Suck of the B12minus2 get more television revenue than UNC and Duke of the ACC? I simply cannot believe that.


T


...

This ^^^ is exactly what I've been bumping heads with some on other boards with about.

I mean, everyone knows including my 3 year old nephew 1+1=2... But yet tv networks were sold on that 1+ 1 lubbock, waco crappy zero markets for example = $20 million plus... Man, that's one hell of a mathematical degree... LOL... Give me a F*****g break.

(08-05-2017 02:53 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 12:43 PM)C0|db|00ded Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 05:38 PM)STLWAVE Wrote:  ACC is lowest of p5 at 22. I'm assuming MWC is highest of the G4, what are they at again? $8-10M would cement AAC in a land of its own. I'd definitely take that.

I don't understand this number at all. Maybe it's on account of my ignorance of football money but... are you telling me that Northwestern of the B1G and K-Suck of the B12minus2 get more television revenue than UNC and Duke of the ACC? I simply cannot believe that.


T


...

This ^^^ is exactly what I've been bumping heads with some on other boards with about.

I mean, everyone knows including my 3 year old nephew 1+1=2... But yet tv networks were sold on that 1+ 1 lubbock, waco crappy zero markets for example = $20 million plus... Man, that's one hell of a mathematical degree... LOL... Give me a F*****g break.

It's branding 101. They don't give a **** where they are located as it's based on a television audience.

My question still remains about UNC and Duke. They aren't underpaid by the networks relative to the nobody FBS schools right? They must have side deals with the big boys of the college basketball world.


T


...

(08-05-2017 03:02 PM)C0|db|00ded Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 02:53 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 12:43 PM)C0|db|00ded Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 05:38 PM)STLWAVE Wrote:  ACC is lowest of p5 at 22. I'm assuming MWC is highest of the G4, what are they at again? $8-10M would cement AAC in a land of its own. I'd definitely take that.

I don't understand this number at all. Maybe it's on account of my ignorance of football money but... are you telling me that Northwestern of the B1G and K-Suck of the B12minus2 get more television revenue than UNC and Duke of the ACC? I simply cannot believe that.


T


...

This ^^^ is exactly what I've been bumping heads with some on other boards with about.

I mean, everyone knows including my 3 year old nephew 1+1=2... But yet tv networks were sold on that 1+ 1 lubbock, waco crappy zero markets for example = $20 million plus... Man, that's one hell of a mathematical degree... LOL... Give me a F*****g break.

It's branding 101. They don't give a **** where they are located as it's based on a television audience.

My question still remains about UNC and Duke. They aren't underpaid by the networks relative to the nobody FBS schools right? They must have side deals with the big boys of the college basketball world.


T


...

Texas Tech isn't worth much, but the value of the Big 12 is top heavy. Think of it as socialism inside a conference.

Schools have chosen to organize and negotiate on a conference level. Individually Duke>Northwestern but the B1G>>>>ACC. The conference charter gives all teams an equal vote and it is in the interest of every school except for Ohio State and Michigan to have an equal split of revenue (same goes for the top 2 in any other conference). This is why you see top teams jumping conferences when given the chance. Duke/UNC can't get into the B1G, Northwestern can't be kicked out. Simple as that.

(08-05-2017 12:11 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Rudd's comments in quotes. My response in bold italics.

"We're 24 months out from the renegotiation of the TV contract, and we are optimistic we will see a significant increase." Hope is not a strategy.

"Myself (Rudd) and SMU's Gerald Turner will be the two presidents working with Mike Aresco on the renegotiation of the TV contract and media rights." At least Compher won't be playing a major role.

"If we are able to get $8-10M per year per school -- or more -- that would be a significant improvement." Duh.

"Even though that may not match up with SEC money, any movement helps keep us competitive and allows us to stay in the top tier of universities." May not match up?

"Our number will increase entirely because we have a compelling product. If you look at viewership over the course of the last two years, our ratings have been competitive, and in some cases more competitive than some elements of the Big 12." You can thank your flagship Houston for that.

Oh bull****. Ucf did as well before 2015.

(08-05-2017 03:10 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 03:02 PM)C0|db|00ded Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 02:53 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 12:43 PM)C0|db|00ded Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 05:38 PM)STLWAVE Wrote:  ACC is lowest of p5 at 22. I'm assuming MWC is highest of the G4, what are they at again? $8-10M would cement AAC in a land of its own. I'd definitely take that.

I don't understand this number at all. Maybe it's on account of my ignorance of football money but... are you telling me that Northwestern of the B1G and K-Suck of the B12minus2 get more television revenue than UNC and Duke of the ACC? I simply cannot believe that.


T


...

This ^^^ is exactly what I've been bumping heads with some on other boards with about.

I mean, everyone knows including my 3 year old nephew 1+1=2... But yet tv networks were sold on that 1+ 1 lubbock, waco crappy zero markets for example = $20 million plus... Man, that's one hell of a mathematical degree... LOL... Give me a F*****g break.

It's branding 101. They don't give a **** where they are located as it's based on a television audience.

My question still remains about UNC and Duke. They aren't underpaid by the networks relative to the nobody FBS schools right? They must have side deals with the big boys of the college basketball world.


T


...

Texas Tech isn't worth much, but the value of the Big 12 is top heavy. Think of it as socialism inside a conference.

Honestly I don't see that league as top heavy, KNIGHTTIME

Mainly b/c minus their two top horses OU and UT the big12 is just another conference, one I will place under the AAC in terms of league strength, markets and historical programs.

(08-05-2017 03:26 PM)breinin2 Wrote:  Schools have chosen to organize and negotiate on a conference level. Individually Duke>Northwestern but the B1G>>>>ACC. The conference charter gives all teams an equal vote and it is in the interest of every school except for Ohio State and Michigan to have an equal split of revenue (same goes for the top 2 in any other conference). This is why you see top teams jumping conferences when given the chance. Duke/UNC can't get into the B1G, Northwestern can't be kicked out. Simple as that.

Wow. If that's accurate then there is zero chance the CH|KUns will ever get into the B1G. If K|UCK-CITY can't leave the B12minus2, then it doesn't break up IMO.


T


...

The Big XII is more top-heavy than Dolly Parton. 80% of the value of that league is in just 2 teams. This is nothing new.

(08-04-2017 06:06 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  That this was pertinent to this thread. East Carolina’s athletics chief will be an integral part of brokering the biggest deal in the young life of the American Athletic Conference, and he sees it as just that.

http://www.reflector.com/ECU/2017/08/04/...-deal.html

Hopefully the AAC honchos will not let that dumba$$ Compher anywhere near this deal. If Compher is involved then the AAC will end up paying ESPN each year.

(08-05-2017 12:37 PM)PuddlePirate Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 12:11 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Rudd's comments in quotes. My response in bold italics.

"We're 24 months out from the renegotiation of the TV contract, and we are optimistic we will see a significant increase." Hope is not a strategy.

"Myself (Rudd) and SMU's Gerald Turner will be the two presidents working with Mike Aresco on the renegotiation of the TV contract and media rights." At least Compher won't be playing a major role.

"If we are able to get $8-10M per year per school -- or more -- that would be a significant improvement." Duh.

"Even though that may not match up with SEC money, any movement helps keep us competitive and allows us to stay in the top tier of universities." May not match up?

"Our number will increase entirely because we have a compelling product. If you look at viewership over the course of the last two years, our ratings have been competitive, and in some cases more competitive than some elements of the Big 12." You can thank your flagship Houston for that.

In an interview this past week Compher said he's been appointed to work on the negotiations.

The AAC is screwed.

(08-05-2017 04:40 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 12:37 PM)PuddlePirate Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 12:11 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Rudd's comments in quotes. My response in bold italics.

"We're 24 months out from the renegotiation of the TV contract, and we are optimistic we will see a significant increase." Hope is not a strategy.

"Myself (Rudd) and SMU's Gerald Turner will be the two presidents working with Mike Aresco on the renegotiation of the TV contract and media rights." At least Compher won't be playing a major role.

"If we are able to get $8-10M per year per school -- or more -- that would be a significant improvement." Duh.

"Even though that may not match up with SEC money, any movement helps keep us competitive and allows us to stay in the top tier of universities." May not match up?

"Our number will increase entirely because we have a compelling product. If you look at viewership over the course of the last two years, our ratings have been competitive, and in some cases more competitive than some elements of the Big 12." You can thank your flagship Houston for that.

In an interview this past week Compher said he's been appointed to work on the negotiations.

The AAC is screwed.

Scapegoats nothing more... Yikes

We have a former TV exec leading the conference. Why on Earth would we want Jeph Comfer involved?

(08-05-2017 03:30 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(08-05-2017 12:11 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Rudd's comments in quotes. My response in bold italics.

"We're 24 months out from the renegotiation of the TV contract, and we are optimistic we will see a significant increase." Hope is not a strategy.

"Myself (Rudd) and SMU's Gerald Turner will be the two presidents working with Mike Aresco on the renegotiation of the TV contract and media rights." At least Compher won't be playing a major role.

"If we are able to get $8-10M per year per school -- or more -- that would be a significant improvement." Duh.

"Even though that may not match up with SEC money, any movement helps keep us competitive and allows us to stay in the top tier of universities." May not match up?

"Our number will increase entirely because we have a compelling product. If you look at viewership over the course of the last two years, our ratings have been competitive, and in some cases more competitive than some elements of the Big 12." You can thank your flagship Houston for that.

Oh bull****. Ucf did as well before 2015.

It helps having a top 25 ranking and a espn slot. Years back when we played houston in our bcs run the tv ranting in the actual Houston market was bad.

(08-05-2017 12:11 PM)CougarRed Wrote:  Rudd's comments in quotes. My response in bold italics.

"We're 24 months out from the renegotiation of the TV contract, and we are optimistic we will see a significant increase." Hope is not a strategy.

"Myself (Rudd) and SMU's Gerald Turner will be the two presidents working with Mike Aresco on the renegotiation of the TV contract and media rights." At least Compher won't be playing a major role.

"If we are able to get $8-10M per year per school -- or more -- that would be a significant improvement." Duh.

"Even though that may not match up with SEC money, any movement helps keep us competitive and allows us to stay in the top tier of universities." May not match up?

"Our number will increase entirely because we have a compelling product. If you look at viewership over the course of the last two years, our ratings have been competitive, and in some cases more competitive than some elements of the Big 12." You can thank your flagship Houston for that.

UCF was beating Baylor and Temple was hosting College Gameday and Notre Dame in prime time before Houston did anything worthy of a thank you.

Rudd specifically mentioned the last two years. Here are the cumulative numbers over the last two years:

Houston - 33.6M viewers

That's 50% higher than 2nd place. And more than five Big 12 schools.

Temple - 21.5M
Memphis - 16.1M
Navy - 16M (not counting Army games since they aren't part of our package)
USF - 12.4M
Tulsa - 12.0M

These five American schools got better ratings the last 2 years than Iowa St and Kansas.

Every other American team drew less than 10M.

Note: Navy would be at 31M if you count the Army games.