(12-20-2017 03:40 PM)Wedge Wrote: (12-20-2017 02:53 PM)arkstfan Wrote: MWC has been pretty big on the Saturday emphasis.
Remember they ditched ESPN for CSTV (now CBSSN) to avoid weeknights.
When you rely on people to do more than drive across town to watch you play, you can't subject them to too many weeknight games.
Or late-night games, even on Saturday. More than half of the MWC teams are in the situation of expecting a large percentage of their season-ticket holders to travel from at least 90 minutes away. CBSSN sets some MWC games to kick off at 8:30 pm local time. That means a game that ends around midnight, and getting home around 2 am (or later if your drive is even longer). If you're a season ticket holder, how much of that are you going to put up with before you don't renew your season tickets? If the athletic department is counting on a lot of fans to drive in from a long way away and purchase individual tickets for big games, how many ticket sales do they lose when the game kicks off at 8:30 pm, which was the game time for Colorado State's home game vs. Boise in November?
And having CBSSN do this to you, when they pay very little for the TV rights and their TV audiences are so low that they don't even subscribe to the Nielsen rating service, that's just pouring salt in the wound.
I think the MW did the math on eroding "in stadium" revenue and dont see much upside at the current ESPN/CBS-Sports payout--esepcially with the MW Digital Network starting to be profitable. I dont think Stadium will be a big part of the MW picture. Remember, to the best of my knowledge Stadium pays nothing (or close to nothing) for TV rights. I dont think Stadium's current model can be profitable if they are paying much for content.
I think the MW is going end up being the anti-AAC in the next negotiatiin round. The AAC will play anywhere and anytime to get a better deal. Their solid ratings and flexibility will make them a popular dance partner in the next TV negotiations.
The MW is going to do just the opposite of the AAC and will end up with a sort of hybrid deal. They are going to take back control on their start times by having the vast majority of their games on the subscription MW Network. I think they believe they cant keep abusing thier ticket buying fans and need to rebuild that base to get the "in stadium" revenue back to where it needs to be. Thus, they will increase value by significantly reducing the supply of MW games available and by severely limiting the number of late night windows they will play.
The MW will offer a 2-game a week premium package with one game at a good agreeable kick time for MW schools and one game in a late window. Those late window games will be distributed equally among MW teams (one each) so--there will only be 12 late start games sold for the entire season. No single team will have to deal with more than one late window game per year (I thnk ESPN buys this package). If the networks balk or wont pay what the MW wants, the MW will just go all digital. Once that premium plan is sold--a smaller plan with games only at kick times agreeable to MW schools will be offered. Thats probably snapped up by CBS-Sports and probably doesnt bring a lot--but its found money if you were willing to go all digital anyway and it increases exposure.
I think the MW could come out ahead monetarily doing something like that. The question is--do they lose too much on the exposure front by having so many games only on digital platforms? If they do, one adjustment that could tweak the exposure level upward would be to make the MWDN a non-subscription service (like it is now) and let Stadium mirror the games on their OTA-Syndicated Network. If they do this, they could add a MWDN commerical to every televised game to drive more viewership to the new digital network.
I could see this working out for the MW if they are smart and the MWDN has the capacity to competently stream all the games it would need to televise.