(05-09-2018 10:55 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  Man this is great. The Chetster must be proud.

Any commentary on the growing CFP revenue gap between the AAC and the G4, EDLUVAR ?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-849596.html

(05-09-2018 05:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 03:04 PM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 02:56 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Regardless of a special deal for the Navy-Army game, the league still benefits greatly from having them. I think the Navy-Army game is worth like $8 million per year, so it makes sense they keep that especially because they had leverage. Boise State never had leverage.

... I am hanging from a very thin thread.

Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army.

P.S. I am a proud Navy vet. Navy ALWAYS goes first.

You win. I give.

(05-09-2018 05:06 PM)TripleA Wrote:  To the thread topic, I see points on both sides, but none of us know all the details at work behind the scenes. My take for now is that Aresco is the right man to be our commish for this. As opposed to Tranghese or Marinatto, for example.

Trained Goose wasn't too bad especially compared to Spaghetti Man Marinara who was absolutely horrible as the Big East Commissioner. He was the worst possible pick out there. This can happen though when you just blindly hand the job down without going outside to see what QUALIFIED APPLICANTS might be out there.

(05-10-2018 05:37 AM)rosewater Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 05:06 PM)TripleA Wrote:  To the thread topic, I see points on both sides, but none of us know all the details at work behind the scenes. My take for now is that Aresco is the right man to be our commish for this. As opposed to Tranghese or Marinatto, for example.

Setting the bar way too low, but agree in substance.

Yeah, I was simply taking the last 2 as the most appropriate examples, not saying all he had to be was better than them. More like contrasting how much better a choice he is for this situation. Or ANY situation, for that matter, lol.

(05-10-2018 07:55 AM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 05:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 03:04 PM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 02:56 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Regardless of a special deal for the Navy-Army game, the league still benefits greatly from having them. I think the Navy-Army game is worth like $8 million per year, so it makes sense they keep that especially because they had leverage. Boise State never had leverage.

... I am hanging from a very thin thread.

Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army, Navy-Army.

P.S. I am a proud Navy vet. Navy ALWAYS goes first.

You win. I give.

LOL. Good answer.

(05-10-2018 08:22 AM)panite Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 05:06 PM)TripleA Wrote:  To the thread topic, I see points on both sides, but none of us know all the details at work behind the scenes. My take for now is that Aresco is the right man to be our commish for this. As opposed to Tranghese or Marinatto, for example.

Trained Goose wasn't too bad especially compared to Spaghetti Man Marinara who was absolutely horrible as the Big East Commissioner. He was the worst possible pick out there. This can happen though when you just blindly hand the job down without going outside to see what QUALIFIED APPLICANTS might be out there.

Yeah, Marinatto was the worst possible. Tranghese was better, but hell, you or I would have been better.

But still, in TV negotiations, whom would you prefer, Tranghese or Aresco? I don't think it's even close.

Alright guys, time to stop bickering.

Capital Gazette Article

Quote:Not having all Navy home games as part of its package will hurt the American Athletic Conference to some degree as it enters into negotiations with ESPN and any other interested networks for its next broadcast agreement.

However, that concern was mitigated tremendously by two concessions Navy made to help out the conference. First and foremost, Navy’s home game with Notre Dame that is held in even years will become part of the American Athletic Conference television package beginning in 2020.

“Getting the Navy-Notre Dame game every other year is extremely valuable,” Aresco said. “That is really, really important.”

Gladchuk believes giving up the home game with Notre Dame, which was previously part of the CBS Sports contract, signified a major commitment to the American Athletic Conference on the part of the Naval Academy Athletic Association.

“Bring that to the table is a big deal. That may be one of the most significant games in the entire conference,” Gladchuk said. “There was some give-and-take by all sides and it should work out to everyone’s benefits on all fronts.”

Additionally, the primary rights-holder for American Athletic Conference football will have first choice of broadcasting one Navy home game per year. That means not all Navy home games will be televised by CBS Sports.

“Giving our primary rights holder the opportunity to pick one Navy home game is extremely important and really mitigates the issue of other Navy home games being on a different carrier,” Aresco said. “Our rights holder already has all of Navy’s road games in the American and now it has access to one Navy home game of its choosing.”

1. AAC gets the Navy-Notre Dame game every other year. Easily the biggest value
2. AAC gets their pick of one home Navy game per year
3. Navy gets to keep Saturday afternoon games
4. Great vote of confidence and show of unity from the Naval Academy.
5. Maximized revenue from a media platform willing to pay for it, while still providing leverage in future media negotiations.

(05-09-2018 04:08 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Can we stipulate a few things here?
- Navy's NMCMS home games, vs 4 AAC opponents and 1 FCS/G4 opponent each year, look to ESPN, FOX, NBC like they're worth MAXIMUM $2million per year. See my back of the envelope math on documented ratings/viewers in post #28.
- CBSSN places a higher value on these games than other bidders. This is because of their own history and branding, but also because they have a NEED to keep the Saturday 3:30 tentpole that they have made Navy games on CBSSN.
- Navy-ND game, every other year, is worth more than two year's worth of Navy NMCMS Home Games, looking at ratings alone, much less the name value of ND.
- The deal in question is an AAC deal for AAC inventory (the five Navy NMCMS home games); in addition, CBSSN also established a deal with Navy for other sports
- Maximizing the value of AAC Media rights will come about by having a multi-tiered deal - primary rights and second tier rights, probably in both basketball and football; some streaming separate revenue; third tier rights either in the conference or returned to schools.
- Army-Navy game (football game or the other 23 "Star Series" contests) is branded as "Army-Navy." Maybe it's alphabetical, maybe it's tradition. I capitalize Sailor in addition to Marine, and I still say Army-Navy.

Right - those are the pretty basic building blocks from which to discuss this, right? If you somehow have trouble with those basics, I will save time and energy by ignoring you.

So...If everyone is willing to do a multi-tiered deal, why are we arguing about having this little CBSSN-Navy tier? It maximizes the $$ value to the AAC of a teeny portion of inventory that CBSSN wants and values more than other potential bidders, while keeping the high value property of Navy-ND in the primary package where it will pull value from any/all bidders.
This is a deal which allows Aresco to extract specific above-market value from these five games per year - probably much greater value than any marginal value of these games being in the primary.

Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in intact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market intact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

Oh here's another snippet from Aresco:

Quote:“We hope to sit down with ESPN later this year and see if we can extend the current deal,” said Aresco, who will be seeking a far more lucrative television deal than the one inked in 2013.

Aresco has said the American Athletic Conference is in a much stronger position now than it was then because of the current membership and performance on the football field and basketball court.


According to multiple media reports, the deal signed with ESPN in 2013 was worth $126 million. Aresco believes the value of AAC athletics is far greater at this time and being able to offer the Navy home game with Notre Dame along with the most attractive annual game at Navy-Marine Corps Memorial Stadium is a major boost to the football package.

I believe the league is looking 6 to 9 million per school over a 10 to 12 year period. Most of the data supports a substantial increase.

(05-10-2018 09:56 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 04:08 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Can we stipulate a few things here?
- Navy's NMCMS home games, vs 4 AAC opponents and 1 FCS/G4 opponent each year, look to ESPN, FOX, NBC like they're worth MAXIMUM $2million per year. See my back of the envelope math on documented ratings/viewers in post #28.
- CBSSN places a higher value on these games than other bidders. This is because of their own history and branding, but also because they have a NEED to keep the Saturday 3:30 tentpole that they have made Navy games on CBSSN.
- Navy-ND game, every other year, is worth more than two year's worth of Navy NMCMS Home Games, looking at ratings alone, much less the name value of ND.
- The deal in question is an AAC deal for AAC inventory (the five Navy NMCMS home games); in addition, CBSSN also established a deal with Navy for other sports
- Maximizing the value of AAC Media rights will come about by having a multi-tiered deal - primary rights and second tier rights, probably in both basketball and football; some streaming separate revenue; third tier rights either in the conference or returned to schools.
- Army-Navy game (football game or the other 23 "Star Series" contests) is branded as "Army-Navy." Maybe it's alphabetical, maybe it's tradition. I capitalize Sailor in addition to Marine, and I still say Army-Navy.

Right - those are the pretty basic building blocks from which to discuss this, right? If you somehow have trouble with those basics, I will save time and energy by ignoring you.

So...If everyone is willing to do a multi-tiered deal, why are we arguing about having this little CBSSN-Navy tier? It maximizes the $$ value to the AAC of a teeny portion of inventory that CBSSN wants and values more than other potential bidders, while keeping the high value property of Navy-ND in the primary package where it will pull value from any/all bidders.
This is a deal which allows Aresco to extract specific above-market value from these five games per year - probably much greater value than any marginal value of these games being in the primary.

Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in tact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market in tact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

(05-10-2018 11:17 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 09:56 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 04:08 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Can we stipulate a few things here?
- Navy's NMCMS home games, vs 4 AAC opponents and 1 FCS/G4 opponent each year, look to ESPN, FOX, NBC like they're worth MAXIMUM $2million per year. See my back of the envelope math on documented ratings/viewers in post #28.
- CBSSN places a higher value on these games than other bidders. This is because of their own history and branding, but also because they have a NEED to keep the Saturday 3:30 tentpole that they have made Navy games on CBSSN.
- Navy-ND game, every other year, is worth more than two year's worth of Navy NMCMS Home Games, looking at ratings alone, much less the name value of ND.
- The deal in question is an AAC deal for AAC inventory (the five Navy NMCMS home games); in addition, CBSSN also established a deal with Navy for other sports
- Maximizing the value of AAC Media rights will come about by having a multi-tiered deal - primary rights and second tier rights, probably in both basketball and football; some streaming separate revenue; third tier rights either in the conference or returned to schools.
- Army-Navy game (football game or the other 23 "Star Series" contests) is branded as "Army-Navy." Maybe it's alphabetical, maybe it's tradition. I capitalize Sailor in addition to Marine, and I still say Army-Navy.

Right - those are the pretty basic building blocks from which to discuss this, right? If you somehow have trouble with those basics, I will save time and energy by ignoring you.

So...If everyone is willing to do a multi-tiered deal, why are we arguing about having this little CBSSN-Navy tier? It maximizes the $$ value to the AAC of a teeny portion of inventory that CBSSN wants and values more than other potential bidders, while keeping the high value property of Navy-ND in the primary package where it will pull value from any/all bidders.
This is a deal which allows Aresco to extract specific above-market value from these five games per year - probably much greater value than any marginal value of these games being in the primary.

Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in tact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market in tact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

Well---think about that. The last P5 to redo their contract went for almost 29 million a team. So, it would basically cost 116 million to move 4 AAC teams to the P5 at the going rate---plus you still have to pay for the rump of the AAC--which would still command 20-30 million. Thats a total of 136-146 million. Not only that, but when you reopen the P5 contract, you going to have to provide a significant raise TO EVERY TEAM already in that conference in order to offset the negative affect of dividing the other league revenue sources by 2-4 additional teams. Thats another 20-30 million. Now the cost is around 270 million.

They could get the entire AAC for 6-9 million a team (72-108 million a year). Even if you move just 2 teams, its costs more than just buying the AAC "as is".

The reality is that its not cost efficient anymore for ESPN to encourage anyone to take AAC schools. Here's a thought. What MIGHT make more sense at this point is increasing the value of the AAC while decreasing the cost. How? Buy the AAC a contract game (if they go 100% all in with ESPN), pay them 7 million team, and then sell off inventory to other bidders for rights to show "the nations newest power conference". The games sold off will go at a much higher price if the AAC has a contract game---thus further offsetting the cost of the AAC to ESPN.

(05-10-2018 11:17 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 09:56 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 04:08 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Can we stipulate a few things here?
- Navy's NMCMS home games, vs 4 AAC opponents and 1 FCS/G4 opponent each year, look to ESPN, FOX, NBC like they're worth MAXIMUM $2million per year. See my back of the envelope math on documented ratings/viewers in post #28.
- CBSSN places a higher value on these games than other bidders. This is because of their own history and branding, but also because they have a NEED to keep the Saturday 3:30 tentpole that they have made Navy games on CBSSN.
- Navy-ND game, every other year, is worth more than two year's worth of Navy NMCMS Home Games, looking at ratings alone, much less the name value of ND.
- The deal in question is an AAC deal for AAC inventory (the five Navy NMCMS home games); in addition, CBSSN also established a deal with Navy for other sports
- Maximizing the value of AAC Media rights will come about by having a multi-tiered deal - primary rights and second tier rights, probably in both basketball and football; some streaming separate revenue; third tier rights either in the conference or returned to schools.
- Army-Navy game (football game or the other 23 "Star Series" contests) is branded as "Army-Navy." Maybe it's alphabetical, maybe it's tradition. I capitalize Sailor in addition to Marine, and I still say Army-Navy.

Right - those are the pretty basic building blocks from which to discuss this, right? If you somehow have trouble with those basics, I will save time and energy by ignoring you.

So...If everyone is willing to do a multi-tiered deal, why are we arguing about having this little CBSSN-Navy tier? It maximizes the $$ value to the AAC of a teeny portion of inventory that CBSSN wants and values more than other potential bidders, while keeping the high value property of Navy-ND in the primary package where it will pull value from any/all bidders.
This is a deal which allows Aresco to extract specific above-market value from these five games per year - probably much greater value than any marginal value of these games being in the primary.

Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in tact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market in tact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

Why would ESPN have, for example, Memphis move to the B12 at $28 million or the ACC at $22 million when they can have them in the American for $9 million? Last time, ESPN was building their own conference, the ACC, and needed schools to fill up the roster. In addition, the college football bubble was expanding then; not so much now.

(05-10-2018 11:49 AM)vick mike Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:17 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 09:56 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 04:08 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Can we stipulate a few things here?
- Navy's NMCMS home games, vs 4 AAC opponents and 1 FCS/G4 opponent each year, look to ESPN, FOX, NBC like they're worth MAXIMUM $2million per year. See my back of the envelope math on documented ratings/viewers in post #28.
- CBSSN places a higher value on these games than other bidders. This is because of their own history and branding, but also because they have a NEED to keep the Saturday 3:30 tentpole that they have made Navy games on CBSSN.
- Navy-ND game, every other year, is worth more than two year's worth of Navy NMCMS Home Games, looking at ratings alone, much less the name value of ND.
- The deal in question is an AAC deal for AAC inventory (the five Navy NMCMS home games); in addition, CBSSN also established a deal with Navy for other sports
- Maximizing the value of AAC Media rights will come about by having a multi-tiered deal - primary rights and second tier rights, probably in both basketball and football; some streaming separate revenue; third tier rights either in the conference or returned to schools.
- Army-Navy game (football game or the other 23 "Star Series" contests) is branded as "Army-Navy." Maybe it's alphabetical, maybe it's tradition. I capitalize Sailor in addition to Marine, and I still say Army-Navy.

Right - those are the pretty basic building blocks from which to discuss this, right? If you somehow have trouble with those basics, I will save time and energy by ignoring you.

So...If everyone is willing to do a multi-tiered deal, why are we arguing about having this little CBSSN-Navy tier? It maximizes the $$ value to the AAC of a teeny portion of inventory that CBSSN wants and values more than other potential bidders, while keeping the high value property of Navy-ND in the primary package where it will pull value from any/all bidders.
This is a deal which allows Aresco to extract specific above-market value from these five games per year - probably much greater value than any marginal value of these games being in the primary.

Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in tact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market in tact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

Why would ESPN have, for example, Memphis move to the B12 at $28 million or the ACC at $22 million when they can have them in the American for $9 million? Last time, ESPN was building their own conference, the ACC, and needed schools to fill up the roster. In addition, the college football bubble was expanding then; not so much now.

But that is what they did back in 2011... ESPN offered the BE $13m/year per team.... When the conference rejected it ESPN made the phone call to the ACC to take Pitt and Syracuse, the ACC media rights deal went up to $30M/team or whatever it is now.

(05-10-2018 11:55 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:49 AM)vick mike Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:17 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 09:56 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 04:08 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Can we stipulate a few things here?
- Navy's NMCMS home games, vs 4 AAC opponents and 1 FCS/G4 opponent each year, look to ESPN, FOX, NBC like they're worth MAXIMUM $2million per year. See my back of the envelope math on documented ratings/viewers in post #28.
- CBSSN places a higher value on these games than other bidders. This is because of their own history and branding, but also because they have a NEED to keep the Saturday 3:30 tentpole that they have made Navy games on CBSSN.
- Navy-ND game, every other year, is worth more than two year's worth of Navy NMCMS Home Games, looking at ratings alone, much less the name value of ND.
- The deal in question is an AAC deal for AAC inventory (the five Navy NMCMS home games); in addition, CBSSN also established a deal with Navy for other sports
- Maximizing the value of AAC Media rights will come about by having a multi-tiered deal - primary rights and second tier rights, probably in both basketball and football; some streaming separate revenue; third tier rights either in the conference or returned to schools.
- Army-Navy game (football game or the other 23 "Star Series" contests) is branded as "Army-Navy." Maybe it's alphabetical, maybe it's tradition. I capitalize Sailor in addition to Marine, and I still say Army-Navy.

Right - those are the pretty basic building blocks from which to discuss this, right? If you somehow have trouble with those basics, I will save time and energy by ignoring you.

So...If everyone is willing to do a multi-tiered deal, why are we arguing about having this little CBSSN-Navy tier? It maximizes the $$ value to the AAC of a teeny portion of inventory that CBSSN wants and values more than other potential bidders, while keeping the high value property of Navy-ND in the primary package where it will pull value from any/all bidders.
This is a deal which allows Aresco to extract specific above-market value from these five games per year - probably much greater value than any marginal value of these games being in the primary.

Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in tact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market in tact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

Why would ESPN have, for example, Memphis move to the B12 at $28 million or the ACC at $22 million when they can have them in the American for $9 million? Last time, ESPN was building their own conference, the ACC, and needed schools to fill up the roster. In addition, the college football bubble was expanding then; not so much now.

But that is what they did back in 2011... ESPN offered the BE $13m/year per team.... When the conference rejected it ESPN made the phone call to the ACC to take Pitt and Syracuse, the ACC media rights deal went up to $30M/team or whatever it is now.

Thats what I have been saying for years. ESPN didnt do it. The ACC did it. The 2011 dismantleing of the old Big East didnt save ESPN a dime----it actually COST ESPN MORE MONEY. If you add up the contracts for all the schools that left, its more than it would have been to just give the Big East the deal they wanted---and its certainly more than the deal ESPN offered in April of 2011.

(05-10-2018 12:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:55 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:49 AM)vick mike Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:17 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 09:56 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in tact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market in tact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

Why would ESPN have, for example, Memphis move to the B12 at $28 million or the ACC at $22 million when they can have them in the American for $9 million? Last time, ESPN was building their own conference, the ACC, and needed schools to fill up the roster. In addition, the college football bubble was expanding then; not so much now.

But that is what they did back in 2011... ESPN offered the BE $13m/year per team.... When the conference rejected it ESPN made the phone call to the ACC to take Pitt and Syracuse, the ACC media rights deal went up to $30M/team or whatever it is now.

Thats what I have been saying for years. ESPN didnt do it. The ACC did it. The 2011 dismantleing of the old Big East didnt save ESPN a dime----it actually COST ESPN MORE MONEY. If you add up the contracts for all the schools that left, its more than it would have been to just give the Big East the deal they wanted---and its certainly more than the deal ESPN offered in April of 2014.

Interesting points and all I can say is I sure hope you guys are right, and that there is no financial incentive to break us up. That would be awesome.

(05-10-2018 01:13 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 12:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:55 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:49 AM)vick mike Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:17 AM)Bull Wrote:  I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

Why would ESPN have, for example, Memphis move to the B12 at $28 million or the ACC at $22 million when they can have them in the American for $9 million? Last time, ESPN was building their own conference, the ACC, and needed schools to fill up the roster. In addition, the college football bubble was expanding then; not so much now.

But that is what they did back in 2011... ESPN offered the BE $13m/year per team.... When the conference rejected it ESPN made the phone call to the ACC to take Pitt and Syracuse, the ACC media rights deal went up to $30M/team or whatever it is now.

Thats what I have been saying for years. ESPN didnt do it. The ACC did it. The 2011 dismantleing of the old Big East didnt save ESPN a dime----it actually COST ESPN MORE MONEY. If you add up the contracts for all the schools that left, its more than it would have been to just give the Big East the deal they wanted---and its certainly more than the deal ESPN offered in April of 2014.

Interesting points and all I can say is I sure hope you guys are right, and that there is no financial incentive to break us up. That would be awesome.

It would make sense for ESPN to elevate (contract bowl/~$10m per team) and own long term than dismantle.

(05-10-2018 12:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:55 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:49 AM)vick mike Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 11:17 AM)Bull Wrote:  

(05-10-2018 09:56 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Great breakdown. I think you are right. To me the question is, can the league make it to the open market in tact? As someone who was a fan when the BE was raided into oblivion after turning down the last deal. If the AAC can make it to open market in tact, I think it'll make out pretty well.

I share your concern, and this is actually a serious thing to consider... We are in almost the exact same position the old BE was (lot of recent success heading into negotiations), when ESPN blew us up. ESPN is not in the habit of giving away money as charity, and they play hardball. Suppose we ask for 6-9 million per team... and then ESPN calls one of their P5 minions and says... 'this is a good time for you to expand'. History would repeat... two schools might go, we would be entirely destabilized, our schools who didn't get the golden ticket would go bonkers. Last time, while we were in negotiations, we had schools/media/fans, demanding their school 'get out' of this conference. It was a loony time...

Why would ESPN have, for example, Memphis move to the B12 at $28 million or the ACC at $22 million when they can have them in the American for $9 million? Last time, ESPN was building their own conference, the ACC, and needed schools to fill up the roster. In addition, the college football bubble was expanding then; not so much now.

But that is what they did back in 2011... ESPN offered the BE $13m/year per team.... When the conference rejected it ESPN made the phone call to the ACC to take Pitt and Syracuse, the ACC media rights deal went up to $30M/team or whatever it is now.

Thats what I have been saying for years. ESPN didnt do it. The ACC did it. The 2011 dismantleing of the old Big East didnt save ESPN a dime----it actually COST ESPN MORE MONEY. If you add up the contracts for all the schools that left, its more than it would have been to just give the Big East the deal they wanted---and its certainly more than the deal ESPN offered in April of 2011.

ESPiN did not have a playoff system in place that had four teams in it at that time. If ESPiN thinks about making a four conference autonomous league, it may be worth while to get this done.

(05-10-2018 07:31 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(05-09-2018 10:55 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote:  Man this is great. The Chetster must be proud.

Any commentary on the growing CFP revenue gap between the AAC and the G4, EDLUVAR ?

https://csnbbs.com/thread-849596.html

I saw EDLUVAR on line, and he WAS reading the CFP revenue thread...but not comment. Probably had to run back to whatever the mwc has for a message board to get his talking points straight.

(05-10-2018 10:18 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  I believe the league is looking 6 to 9 million per school over a 10 to 12 year period. Most of the data supports a substantial increase.

Almost nailed it.

The Navy contract tells us a lot. The deal we sign in 2020 will be ending at the same time as this Navy/AAC deal. We are splitting into tiers but not in a traditional way, which is very smart but he will still want to have the option for the whole inventory on the next round of media negotians after this one.

Aresco is selling or media rights like a venture capitalist who just came in and saved a far flung conglomerate. He's selling each individual part for it's maximum value. Some version of third tier rights will most likely be returning to individual schools. I expect he will divide up football into two blocks for sale and basketball will be divided into multiple blocks that can be moved separately or attached to the the football side, and finally an Olympic sports deal.

Also for those thinking navy got a sweet heart deal on their conference, you're right, but it wasn't the AAC they got it on. They just sold their rights to the Patriot league sports as a separate deal to CBS sports. The AAC inventory money goes to the whole conference as part of the distribution. We're going to get our money out of a media slush fund and Navy just kicked in a top notch portion that also let's them do what they want in scheduling. This is only a bad deal if we would have got significantly more for those 4 individual games each year which is doubtful.

The side navy deal is also good for a second reason. It's a strong indicator that CBS sports wants and will pay for strong content. Possibly more than what others are willing to pay as seen by them buying content from ESPN currently and the number of sports games are present for them to choose from.

Another minor bonus is that it appears CBS sports will get some AAC content and while Navy is a member of the Patriot league for other sports they will still be associated with us through the network which will only reinforce the football relationship in public perception.

NBC is a player and CBS is interested the question is if it includes some OTA or just their sports channels and how much are they willing to pay. Right now CBS seems willing to give good value for select inventory. Aresco just got to shoot one across the bow of all the media companies. He got a little early sample of what his inventory is worth on the open market and I expect he will maximise it's leverage. I haven't seen a value on this yet. My guess is they are keeping that close to the vest. Aresco wants to control the narrative here and instigate a bidding war a little bluffing may go a long way towards that.