(07-04-2019 01:15 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 06:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:13 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  I compared the Big10 $2.64B over 6 years with the $1B/12year deal AAC JUST NEGOTIATED- like, that captures current value.
And PAC12 $3B 12 years.
BigXII well publicized $20M per team per year for MEDIA.

Clueless people fail to separate total distribution from media and thus YOU are the apples to oranges guy
Quo just keeps digging.

Poor Navy, always trying to act like he's just presenting facts, when in fact he's a slippery eel who uses selected data and spin to skew things in favor of his beloved AAC.

We know the B1G just distributed $52m per school ** . Where does that money come from? Primarily media, also CFP/bowls. We know CFP/bowls are about $7m a school. Maybe another $3m from NCAA credits to the conference, and CCG ticket sales.

So that knocks it down to around $42m for that year. By your math, the B1G is getting $31.4 million for its media rights, so where is that extra $10m coming from?

I'd say it's probably coming from media money not captured by your $2.64B/6 year deal - a deal they signed in June 2017, almost two years before this recent AAC deal. That deal went into effect Fall of 2017, three years before this AAC deal does but you think is a current value comparison.

If you don't think so, keep digging Eel.


** That's for 2017-2018 ... for 2018-2019 it's about $56m. I wonder what it will be by the time the AAC schools actually start collecting the $6m (to start) for that deal that doesn't start until 2020-2021 but which Eel calls "current value"?

Wrong.

Big 12 has an average $20 million in media but distributed $35 million. Big 10 has a similar $15 million or so separate from media ($440 million Fox/ESPN/CBS + $110 million or more from BTN-which comes to about $40 million per school).

You say I'm "wrong", and then admit the B1G gets about $40m per school in media money?

The BTN is media money, right?

Try this....

The Big10 reported record revenues of $759 for 2017-2018 year, distributing roughly $54 million per member institution.
This dwarfed other "P5" conferences like the BIgXII, which announcedd it will distribute $38.8 million to each of its ten member institutions.

Obviously, there is a gap between $759 million and $388 million. CFP payments for 2017-2018 were roughly equal, in fact favoring the BigXII $69.84 million to $68.87 million. The Big Ten Network is a large chunk of the difference, with csnbbs posters estimating $110 million from that.
The biggest difference between the two conferences - and the biggest single chunk of each conference's revenue - is in primary media rights contracts. Big10 primary media rights are under ESPN and Fox deals adding up to 6 years $2.64 Billion - $440 million per year. The BigXII's primary media rights contracts were worth $200 million per year (prior to the April 2019 expansion of ESPN buying the three CCGs dropped by Fox and expanding BigXII coverage on ESPN+).

Why is the Big10 primary media rights contract worth 2.2 times what the BigXII contract is worth?
In 2017, the Big10's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 150,425,000 million viewers and the BigXII's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 72,583,000 viewers - 2.07 times as many viewers for 2.2 times the dollars.
Big10 had 307,104,000 viewers aggregated 2017-2018, compared to BigXII's 173,464,000, down to 1.77 times as many viewers getting 2.2 times the money.

The primary media rights contracts are proportional value to viewers across all the FBS conferences.

Honest question. By your analysis, about where do you think Quo's NBE new contract figures will tally.

(07-04-2019 01:34 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 01:15 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 06:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Poor Navy, always trying to act like he's just presenting facts, when in fact he's a slippery eel who uses selected data and spin to skew things in favor of his beloved AAC.

We know the B1G just distributed $52m per school ** . Where does that money come from? Primarily media, also CFP/bowls. We know CFP/bowls are about $7m a school. Maybe another $3m from NCAA credits to the conference, and CCG ticket sales.

So that knocks it down to around $42m for that year. By your math, the B1G is getting $31.4 million for its media rights, so where is that extra $10m coming from?

I'd say it's probably coming from media money not captured by your $2.64B/6 year deal - a deal they signed in June 2017, almost two years before this recent AAC deal. That deal went into effect Fall of 2017, three years before this AAC deal does but you think is a current value comparison.

If you don't think so, keep digging Eel.


** That's for 2017-2018 ... for 2018-2019 it's about $56m. I wonder what it will be by the time the AAC schools actually start collecting the $6m (to start) for that deal that doesn't start until 2020-2021 but which Eel calls "current value"?

Wrong.

Big 12 has an average $20 million in media but distributed $35 million. Big 10 has a similar $15 million or so separate from media ($440 million Fox/ESPN/CBS + $110 million or more from BTN-which comes to about $40 million per school).

You say I'm "wrong", and then admit the B1G gets about $40m per school in media money?

The BTN is media money, right?

Try this....

The Big10 reported record revenues of $759 for 2017-2018 year, distributing roughly $54 million per member institution.
This dwarfed other "P5" conferences like the BIgXII, which announcedd it will distribute $38.8 million to each of its ten member institutions.

Obviously, there is a gap between $759 million and $388 million. CFP payments for 2017-2018 were roughly equal, in fact favoring the BigXII $69.84 million to $68.87 million. The Big Ten Network is a large chunk of the difference, with csnbbs posters estimating $110 million from that.
The biggest difference between the two conferences - and the biggest single chunk of each conference's revenue - is in primary media rights contracts. Big10 primary media rights are under ESPN and Fox deals adding up to 6 years $2.64 Billion - $440 million per year. The BigXII's primary media rights contracts were worth $200 million per year (prior to the April 2019 expansion of ESPN buying the three CCGs dropped by Fox and expanding BigXII coverage on ESPN+).

Why is the Big10 primary media rights contract worth 2.2 times what the BigXII contract is worth?
In 2017, the Big10's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 150,425,000 million viewers and the BigXII's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 72,583,000 viewers - 2.07 times as many viewers for 2.2 times the dollars.
Big10 had 307,104,000 viewers aggregated 2017-2018, compared to BigXII's 173,464,000, down to 1.77 times as many viewers getting 2.2 times the money.

The primary media rights contracts are proportional value to viewers across all the FBS conferences.

Honest question. By your analysis, about where do you think Quo's NBE new contract figures will tally.

It's not just football, it's pretty much live event viewers have a set value, unlike recorded media (standard sitcoms, dramas, talk shows, highlights) live viewers are locked in to watch the program. With falling viewership and modern technology the live viewer is the gold standard of media companies. The value ranges some but it's pretty consistent in the same way Slhnavy has demonstrated with the media contracts. This is also why you won't see single digit conferences in football again and 14 or 16 will become the standard. Total viewers are limited when you have fewer teams and therefore fewer games to show. As the Big Xii numbers show (especially including the OU/Texas third tier for them) you can compensate some by high viewership but there is a limit.

(07-04-2019 01:15 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 06:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:13 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  I compared the Big10 $2.64B over 6 years with the $1B/12year deal AAC JUST NEGOTIATED- like, that captures current value.
And PAC12 $3B 12 years.
BigXII well publicized $20M per team per year for MEDIA.

Clueless people fail to separate total distribution from media and thus YOU are the apples to oranges guy
Quo just keeps digging.

Poor Navy, always trying to act like he's just presenting facts, when in fact he's a slippery eel who uses selected data and spin to skew things in favor of his beloved AAC.

We know the B1G just distributed $52m per school ** . Where does that money come from? Primarily media, also CFP/bowls. We know CFP/bowls are about $7m a school. Maybe another $3m from NCAA credits to the conference, and CCG ticket sales.

So that knocks it down to around $42m for that year. By your math, the B1G is getting $31.4 million for its media rights, so where is that extra $10m coming from?

I'd say it's probably coming from media money not captured by your $2.64B/6 year deal - a deal they signed in June 2017, almost two years before this recent AAC deal. That deal went into effect Fall of 2017, three years before this AAC deal does but you think is a current value comparison.

If you don't think so, keep digging Eel.


** That's for 2017-2018 ... for 2018-2019 it's about $56m. I wonder what it will be by the time the AAC schools actually start collecting the $6m (to start) for that deal that doesn't start until 2020-2021 but which Eel calls "current value"?

Wrong.

Big 12 has an average $20 million in media but distributed $35 million. Big 10 has a similar $15 million or so separate from media ($440 million Fox/ESPN/CBS + $110 million or more from BTN-which comes to about $40 million per school).

You say I'm "wrong", and then admit the B1G gets about $40m per school in media money?

The BTN is media money, right?

Try this....

The Big10 reported record revenues of $759 for 2017-2018 year, distributing roughly $54 million per member institution.
This dwarfed other "P5" conferences like the BIgXII, which announcedd it will distribute $38.8 million to each of its ten member institutions.

Obviously, there is a gap between $759 million and $388 million. CFP payments for 2017-2018 were roughly equal, in fact favoring the BigXII $69.84 million to $68.87 million. The Big Ten Network is a large chunk of the difference, with csnbbs posters estimating $110 million from that.
The biggest difference between the two conferences - and the biggest single chunk of each conference's revenue - is in primary media rights contracts. Big10 primary media rights are under ESPN and Fox deals adding up to 6 years $2.64 Billion - $440 million per year. The BigXII's primary media rights contracts were worth $200 million per year (prior to the April 2019 expansion of ESPN buying the three CCGs dropped by Fox and expanding BigXII coverage on ESPN+).

Why is the Big10 primary media rights contract worth 2.2 times what the BigXII contract is worth?
In 2017, the Big10's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 150,425,000 million viewers and the BigXII's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 72,583,000 viewers - 2.07 times as many viewers for 2.2 times the dollars.
Big10 had 307,104,000 viewers aggregated 2017-2018, compared to BigXII's 173,464,000, down to 1.77 times as many viewers getting 2.2 times the money.

The primary media rights contracts are proportional value to viewers across all the FBS conferences.

Now you've had to limit yourself to talk of "primary media rights" contracts, and to a comparison of P5 vs P5, a comparison I didn't make. It wouldn't surprise me if P5 conferences are paid based roughly proportional to ratings, because P5 conferences are categorically similar in terms of overall brand value. The intangibles wash out, so what is left are the hard numbers.

What started this was my contention that the AAC and ESPN will settle the UConn issue in a revenue-neutral manner, the left-behinds will get the same $7m they would have got had UConn remained.

In contrast, AAC fanboys who want to think they will get a bump are insisting that if you parse UConn's football ratings, they were really only worth $3m a year or something, whatever it was you came up with a few posts ago. As stated above, my belief is that ratings alone don't determine TV rights, there are intangible "brand" factors that matter as well, and UConn is the most well-known and biggest brand among all full-member AAC schools. That in my view will cancel out the poor ratings for their poor football team and so the money will be a wash.

We will probably find out soon enough, and if the AAC fanboys are right, and if ESPN agrees to let the AAC keep a good portion of what UConn was going to get, heck any portion, I will be the first to admit I was wrong.

As for the AAC vs B1G, the bottom line is, the AAC is currently making $2m in media money, and beginning in late 2020, more than a year from now, will begin making a little over $6m, rising incrementally to just shy of $8m over the next 12 years.

The B1G is, right now, probably making about $43m in media money. And whereas the AAC number will never rise higher than the piddly $8m it caps at over the next 12 years, the B1G has seen its numbers rise each year, and they get a new contract in 2023, just 2.5 years after the AAC deal kicks in. Again, unless you think that deal will be stagnant or go down, things will just get worse.

So the AAC isn't making a ratings-percentage of B1G media money now, they won't be in 2021, and I will bet you they won't be in 2023 and beyond.

But hey .... we shall see.

(07-04-2019 05:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 01:15 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 06:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 06:52 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Poor Navy, always trying to act like he's just presenting facts, when in fact he's a slippery eel who uses selected data and spin to skew things in favor of his beloved AAC.

We know the B1G just distributed $52m per school ** . Where does that money come from? Primarily media, also CFP/bowls. We know CFP/bowls are about $7m a school. Maybe another $3m from NCAA credits to the conference, and CCG ticket sales.

So that knocks it down to around $42m for that year. By your math, the B1G is getting $31.4 million for its media rights, so where is that extra $10m coming from?

I'd say it's probably coming from media money not captured by your $2.64B/6 year deal - a deal they signed in June 2017, almost two years before this recent AAC deal. That deal went into effect Fall of 2017, three years before this AAC deal does but you think is a current value comparison.

If you don't think so, keep digging Eel.


** That's for 2017-2018 ... for 2018-2019 it's about $56m. I wonder what it will be by the time the AAC schools actually start collecting the $6m (to start) for that deal that doesn't start until 2020-2021 but which Eel calls "current value"?

Wrong.

Big 12 has an average $20 million in media but distributed $35 million. Big 10 has a similar $15 million or so separate from media ($440 million Fox/ESPN/CBS + $110 million or more from BTN-which comes to about $40 million per school).

You say I'm "wrong", and then admit the B1G gets about $40m per school in media money?

The BTN is media money, right?

Try this....

The Big10 reported record revenues of $759 for 2017-2018 year, distributing roughly $54 million per member institution.
This dwarfed other "P5" conferences like the BIgXII, which announcedd it will distribute $38.8 million to each of its ten member institutions.

Obviously, there is a gap between $759 million and $388 million. CFP payments for 2017-2018 were roughly equal, in fact favoring the BigXII $69.84 million to $68.87 million. The Big Ten Network is a large chunk of the difference, with csnbbs posters estimating $110 million from that.
The biggest difference between the two conferences - and the biggest single chunk of each conference's revenue - is in primary media rights contracts. Big10 primary media rights are under ESPN and Fox deals adding up to 6 years $2.64 Billion - $440 million per year. The BigXII's primary media rights contracts were worth $200 million per year (prior to the April 2019 expansion of ESPN buying the three CCGs dropped by Fox and expanding BigXII coverage on ESPN+).

Why is the Big10 primary media rights contract worth 2.2 times what the BigXII contract is worth?
In 2017, the Big10's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 150,425,000 million viewers and the BigXII's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 72,583,000 viewers - 2.07 times as many viewers for 2.2 times the dollars.
Big10 had 307,104,000 viewers aggregated 2017-2018, compared to BigXII's 173,464,000, down to 1.77 times as many viewers getting 2.2 times the money.

The primary media rights contracts are proportional value to viewers across all the FBS conferences.

Now you've had to limit yourself to talk of "primary media rights" contracts, and to a comparison of P5 vs P5, a comparison I didn't make. It wouldn't surprise me if P5 conferences are paid based roughly proportional to ratings, because P5 conferences are categorically similar in terms of overall brand value. The intangibles wash out, so what is left are the hard numbers.

What started this was my contention that the AAC and ESPN will settle the UConn issue in a revenue-neutral manner, the left-behinds will get the same $7m they would have got had UConn remained.

In contrast, AAC fanboys who want to think they will get a bump are insisting that if you parse UConn's football ratings, they were really only worth $3m a year or something, whatever it was you came up with a few posts ago. As stated above, my belief is that ratings alone don't determine TV rights, there are intangible "brand" factors that matter as well, and UConn is the most well-known and biggest brand among all full-member AAC schools. That in my view will cancel out the poor ratings for their poor football team and so the money will be a wash.

We will probably find out soon enough, and if the AAC fanboys are right, and if ESPN agrees to let the AAC keep a good portion of what UConn was going to get, heck any portion, I will be the first to admit I was wrong.

As for the AAC vs B1G, the bottom line is, the AAC is currently making $2m in media money, and beginning in late 2020, more than a year from now, will begin making a little over $6m, rising incrementally to just shy of $8m over the next 12 years.

The B1G is, right now, probably making about $43m in media money. And whereas the AAC number will never rise higher than the piddly $8m it caps at over the next 12 years, the B1G has seen its numbers rise each year, and they get a new contract in 2023, just 2.5 years after the AAC deal kicks in. Again, unless you think that deal will be stagnant or go down, things will just get worse.

So the AAC isn't making a ratings-percentage of B1G media money now, they won't be in 2021, and I will bet you they won't be in 2023 and beyond.

But hey .... we shall see.

The funny thing is---after thinking about it---it may end up working out just as the AAC "fanboys" insist, regardless of how it turns out. The "fanboys" (as you call them) say ESPN wont cut the AAC TV deal because most of the value was in football and UConn football had little value. Maybe that happens. If it does, the rest of the teams then can split the UConn share and get a slight raise for a couple of years until they decide on a 12th member.

Now---lets say, the "fanboys" are wrong. ESPN says UConn was a loss---but if you replace the inventory with someone off our list, we will leave the payout the same. I think that's actually a fairly likely outcome. What will happen is the new team will enter the league----getting a partial pay out for a couple of years (and pay an entry fee)---so the 11 AAC teams could still end up seeing a small short term raise for a couple of years until the new team gets a full share.

In other words, its fairly likely the 11 remaining AAC teams will see a short term bump in pay either way.

(07-04-2019 05:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 05:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 01:15 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 06:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2019 07:21 PM)bullet Wrote:  Wrong.

Big 12 has an average $20 million in media but distributed $35 million. Big 10 has a similar $15 million or so separate from media ($440 million Fox/ESPN/CBS + $110 million or more from BTN-which comes to about $40 million per school).

You say I'm "wrong", and then admit the B1G gets about $40m per school in media money?

The BTN is media money, right?

Try this....

The Big10 reported record revenues of $759 for 2017-2018 year, distributing roughly $54 million per member institution.
This dwarfed other "P5" conferences like the BIgXII, which announcedd it will distribute $38.8 million to each of its ten member institutions.

Obviously, there is a gap between $759 million and $388 million. CFP payments for 2017-2018 were roughly equal, in fact favoring the BigXII $69.84 million to $68.87 million. The Big Ten Network is a large chunk of the difference, with csnbbs posters estimating $110 million from that.
The biggest difference between the two conferences - and the biggest single chunk of each conference's revenue - is in primary media rights contracts. Big10 primary media rights are under ESPN and Fox deals adding up to 6 years $2.64 Billion - $440 million per year. The BigXII's primary media rights contracts were worth $200 million per year (prior to the April 2019 expansion of ESPN buying the three CCGs dropped by Fox and expanding BigXII coverage on ESPN+).

Why is the Big10 primary media rights contract worth 2.2 times what the BigXII contract is worth?
In 2017, the Big10's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 150,425,000 million viewers and the BigXII's conference inventory on ESPN and Fox networks garnered 72,583,000 viewers - 2.07 times as many viewers for 2.2 times the dollars.
Big10 had 307,104,000 viewers aggregated 2017-2018, compared to BigXII's 173,464,000, down to 1.77 times as many viewers getting 2.2 times the money.

The primary media rights contracts are proportional value to viewers across all the FBS conferences.

Now you've had to limit yourself to talk of "primary media rights" contracts, and to a comparison of P5 vs P5, a comparison I didn't make. It wouldn't surprise me if P5 conferences are paid based roughly proportional to ratings, because P5 conferences are categorically similar in terms of overall brand value. The intangibles wash out, so what is left are the hard numbers.

What started this was my contention that the AAC and ESPN will settle the UConn issue in a revenue-neutral manner, the left-behinds will get the same $7m they would have got had UConn remained.

In contrast, AAC fanboys who want to think they will get a bump are insisting that if you parse UConn's football ratings, they were really only worth $3m a year or something, whatever it was you came up with a few posts ago. As stated above, my belief is that ratings alone don't determine TV rights, there are intangible "brand" factors that matter as well, and UConn is the most well-known and biggest brand among all full-member AAC schools. That in my view will cancel out the poor ratings for their poor football team and so the money will be a wash.

We will probably find out soon enough, and if the AAC fanboys are right, and if ESPN agrees to let the AAC keep a good portion of what UConn was going to get, heck any portion, I will be the first to admit I was wrong.

As for the AAC vs B1G, the bottom line is, the AAC is currently making $2m in media money, and beginning in late 2020, more than a year from now, will begin making a little over $6m, rising incrementally to just shy of $8m over the next 12 years.

The B1G is, right now, probably making about $43m in media money. And whereas the AAC number will never rise higher than the piddly $8m it caps at over the next 12 years, the B1G has seen its numbers rise each year, and they get a new contract in 2023, just 2.5 years after the AAC deal kicks in. Again, unless you think that deal will be stagnant or go down, things will just get worse.

So the AAC isn't making a ratings-percentage of B1G media money now, they won't be in 2021, and I will bet you they won't be in 2023 and beyond.

But hey .... we shall see.

The funny thing is---after thinking about it---it may end up working out just as the AAC "fanboys" insist, regardless of how it turns out. The "fanboys" (as you call them) say ESPN wont cut the AAC TV deal because most of the value was in football and UConn football had little value. Maybe that happens. I it does, the rest of the teams then can split the UConn share and get a slight raise for a couple of years until the decide on a 12th member.

Now---lets say, the "fanboys" are wrong. ESPN says UConn was a loss---but if you replace the inventory with someone off our list, we will leave the payout the same. I think that's actually a fairly likely outcome. What will happen is the new team will enter the league----getting a partial pay out for a couple of years and pay an entry fee---so the 11 AAC teams could still end up seeing a small short term raise for a couple of years until the new team gets a full share.

In other words, its fairly likely the 11 remaining AAC teams will see a short term bump in pay either way.

FWIW, I hope I am wrong, as USF can use all the money we can get. Our top administration has done an amazing job the past 20 years, when I return to campus these days, I can tangibly see how much the facilities in every area have improved since I matriculated there in the 1980s and into the 1990s. Some areas of campus are basically unrecognizable, in a very good way. If there was a national award for "best run public university since circa 2000", I think USF would be a finalist for it. But in athletics, we like all G5 are falling further behind every year.

And yes, I haven't addressed the issue of if the AAC backfills and gets a 12th full member. I expect that in that case, the AAC won't select anyone unless ESPN guarantees that this new member will not reduce the payout of $7m guaranteed to the other 11 under the original deal.

The only possible exception is if the reduction is small, and a 12th member adds value in some other important way, such as solving a CCG problem with the NCAA or internal conference scheduling problem and the like. Ideally, the new member would actually boost our value a bit, but I think that given what's out there, that's very unlikely.

(07-04-2019 05:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The funny thing is---after thinking about it---it may end up working out just as the AAC "fanboys" insist, regardless of how it turns out. The "fanboys" (as you call them) say ESPN wont cut the AAC TV deal because most of the value was in football and UConn football had little value. Maybe that happens. If it does, the rest of the teams then can split the UConn share and get a slight raise for a couple of years until they decide on a 12th member.

Now---lets say, the "fanboys" are wrong. ESPN says UConn was a loss---but if you replace the inventory with someone off our list, we will leave the payout the same. I think that's actually a fairly likely outcome. What will happen is the new team will enter the league----getting a partial pay out for a couple of years (and pay an entry fee)---so the 11 AAC teams could still end up seeing a small short term raise for a couple of years until the new team gets a full share.

In other words, its fairly likely the 11 remaining AAC teams will see a short term bump in pay either way.

It's just the easiest thing for everyone involved. FB conferences need even # members. More than likely an all sports member will be added. I don't think BYU or Army say yes. I don't think a MWC team jumps unless it seems the MWC is going to take a pounding in their TV negotiations and they decide the AAC is the better option. If thats in play then IMHO the short list would be CSU, Air Force (full membership), Marshall, UAB, ODU and Buffalo. Maybe someone else pops up out of the blue but I think these would be the conferences best bets.

(07-04-2019 07:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 05:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The funny thing is---after thinking about it---it may end up working out just as the AAC "fanboys" insist, regardless of how it turns out. The "fanboys" (as you call them) say ESPN wont cut the AAC TV deal because most of the value was in football and UConn football had little value. Maybe that happens. If it does, the rest of the teams then can split the UConn share and get a slight raise for a couple of years until they decide on a 12th member.

Now---lets say, the "fanboys" are wrong. ESPN says UConn was a loss---but if you replace the inventory with someone off our list, we will leave the payout the same. I think that's actually a fairly likely outcome. What will happen is the new team will enter the league----getting a partial pay out for a couple of years (and pay an entry fee)---so the 11 AAC teams could still end up seeing a small short term raise for a couple of years until the new team gets a full share.

In other words, its fairly likely the 11 remaining AAC teams will see a short term bump in pay either way.

It's just the easiest thing for everyone involved. FB conferences need even # members. More than likely an all sports member will be added. I don't think BYU or Army say yes. I don't think a MWC team jumps unless it seems the MWC is going to take a pounding in their TV negotiations and they decide the AAC is the better option. If thats in play then IMHO the short list would be CSU, Air Force (full membership), Marshall, UAB, ODU and Buffalo. Maybe someone else pops up out of the blue but I think these would be the conferences best bets.

I do think that's the most likely outcome if the AAC wants to keep the contract as is. That said---reducing the deal on a pro-rata basis might be an option if ESPN can do without the inventory and the AAC simply doesnt want to be forced into adding a school from a candidate pool where nobody really checks all the boxes. Coulld even be a hybrid---reduced pro rata payout--but the AAC must provide a full 12 member inventory by 2022.

I'd say ODU, UAB, and Buffalo are easy to cross off the list. Id invite VCU and give someone with a good football program (and olympic sports options) a "football only" invite. There are several options---so whoever says yes first gets it.

(07-04-2019 08:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 07:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 05:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The funny thing is---after thinking about it---it may end up working out just as the AAC "fanboys" insist, regardless of how it turns out. The "fanboys" (as you call them) say ESPN wont cut the AAC TV deal because most of the value was in football and UConn football had little value. Maybe that happens. If it does, the rest of the teams then can split the UConn share and get a slight raise for a couple of years until they decide on a 12th member.

Now---lets say, the "fanboys" are wrong. ESPN says UConn was a loss---but if you replace the inventory with someone off our list, we will leave the payout the same. I think that's actually a fairly likely outcome. What will happen is the new team will enter the league----getting a partial pay out for a couple of years (and pay an entry fee)---so the 11 AAC teams could still end up seeing a small short term raise for a couple of years until the new team gets a full share.

In other words, its fairly likely the 11 remaining AAC teams will see a short term bump in pay either way.

It's just the easiest thing for everyone involved. FB conferences need even # members. More than likely an all sports member will be added. I don't think BYU or Army say yes. I don't think a MWC team jumps unless it seems the MWC is going to take a pounding in their TV negotiations and they decide the AAC is the better option. If thats in play then IMHO the short list would be CSU, Air Force (full membership), Marshall, UAB, ODU and Buffalo. Maybe someone else pops up out of the blue but I think these would be the conferences best bets.

I do think that's the most likely outcome if the AAC wants to keep the contract as is. That said---reducing the deal on a pro-rata basis might be an option if ESPN can do without the inventory and the AAC simply doesnt want to be forced into adding a school from a candidate pool where nobody really checks all the boxes. Coulld even be a hybrid---reduced pro rata payout--but the AAC must provide a full 12 member inventory by 2022.

I'd say ODU, UAB, and Buffalo are easy to cross off the list. Id invite VCU and give someone with a good football program (and olympic sports options) a "football only" invite. There are several options---so whoever says yes first gets it.

With the TV deal in place for 12 years there is little reason to stay at 11, it makes scheduling in FB difficult, (figuring adding a team would mean no changes to the contract) wouldn't take money from any of the members, would give said program a good amount of time to get up to AAC standards. It's a very good opportunity for the AAC to create and show their own value. I wouldn't cross off any of those teams on my list for they are legit possible future conference mates.

(07-04-2019 09:00 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 08:42 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 07:41 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 05:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The funny thing is---after thinking about it---it may end up working out just as the AAC "fanboys" insist, regardless of how it turns out. The "fanboys" (as you call them) say ESPN wont cut the AAC TV deal because most of the value was in football and UConn football had little value. Maybe that happens. If it does, the rest of the teams then can split the UConn share and get a slight raise for a couple of years until they decide on a 12th member.

Now---lets say, the "fanboys" are wrong. ESPN says UConn was a loss---but if you replace the inventory with someone off our list, we will leave the payout the same. I think that's actually a fairly likely outcome. What will happen is the new team will enter the league----getting a partial pay out for a couple of years (and pay an entry fee)---so the 11 AAC teams could still end up seeing a small short term raise for a couple of years until the new team gets a full share.

In other words, its fairly likely the 11 remaining AAC teams will see a short term bump in pay either way.

It's just the easiest thing for everyone involved. FB conferences need even # members. More than likely an all sports member will be added. I don't think BYU or Army say yes. I don't think a MWC team jumps unless it seems the MWC is going to take a pounding in their TV negotiations and they decide the AAC is the better option. If thats in play then IMHO the short list would be CSU, Air Force (full membership), Marshall, UAB, ODU and Buffalo. Maybe someone else pops up out of the blue but I think these would be the conferences best bets.

I do think that's the most likely outcome if the AAC wants to keep the contract as is. That said---reducing the deal on a pro-rata basis might be an option if ESPN can do without the inventory and the AAC simply doesnt want to be forced into adding a school from a candidate pool where nobody really checks all the boxes. Coulld even be a hybrid---reduced pro rata payout--but the AAC must provide a full 12 member inventory by 2022.

I'd say ODU, UAB, and Buffalo are easy to cross off the list. Id invite VCU and give someone with a good football program (and olympic sports options) a "football only" invite. There are several options---so whoever says yes first gets it.

With the TV deal in place for 12 years there is little reason to stay at 11, it makes scheduling in FB difficult, (figuring adding a team would mean no changes to the contract) wouldn't take money from any of the members, would give said program a good amount of time to get up to AAC standards. It's a very good opportunity for the AAC to create and show their own value. I wouldn't cross off any of those teams on my list for they are legit possible future conference mates.

Its funny---had Buffalo stayed with their "New York" statewide branding they started in 2013----I wonder if they would be much better positioned in the eyes of ESPN and the AAC. My sense is they would.

(07-04-2019 09:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Its funny---had Buffalo stayed with their "New York" statewide branding they started in 2013----I wonder if they would be much better positioned in the eyes of ESPN and the AAC. My sense is they would.

Branding only matters if it sticks ... a Buffalo team can claim to be "New York" all it wants, but that won't stick even as far as Albany, never mind downstate.

The AAC will be happy to let the northern border of their conference move to Philadelphia.

(07-04-2019 10:03 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 09:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Its funny---had Buffalo stayed with their "New York" statewide branding they started in 2013----I wonder if they would be much better positioned in the eyes of ESPN and the AAC. My sense is they would.

Branding only matters if it sticks ... a Buffalo team can claim to be "New York" all it wants, but that won't stick even as far as Albany, never mind downstate.

The AAC will be happy to let the northern border of their conference move to Philadelphia.

Of course. But it takes more than one season to do it. Buffalo walked away from the attempt far too quickly. Like it or hate it---ULL is finally making enough inroads with their attempt to rebrand that its possible that more people now use the new name than the old ULL. lol....I still use ULL---but really only because its quicker to type.

(07-04-2019 10:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:03 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 09:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Its funny---had Buffalo stayed with their "New York" statewide branding they started in 2013----I wonder if they would be much better positioned in the eyes of ESPN and the AAC. My sense is they would.

Branding only matters if it sticks ... a Buffalo team can claim to be "New York" all it wants, but that won't stick even as far as Albany, never mind downstate.

The AAC will be happy to let the northern border of their conference move to Philadelphia.

Of course. But it takes more than one season to do it. Buffalo walked away from the attempt far too quickly. Like it or hate it---ULL is finally making enough inroads with their attempt to rebrand that its possible that more people now use the new name than the old ULL. lol....I still use ULL---but really only because its quicker to type.

Funny, I was going to say the opposite - to me, the ULL "Louisiana" campaign has been a big failure. Yes, they have managed to convince ESPN and the other networks to use "Louisiana" on their score scrolls, but I'm not sure what impact that has had. I think nobody knows what school that is when they see it, LOL.

Certainly, here in Louisiana, if anything the Rajin Cajun profile has diminished in recent years, as the football team has gone into a slump.

Personally, I've always felt that the RC nickname is distinctive enough that it should be the focus of their branding and marketing, not the vain (in multiple ways) attempt to be regarded as Louisiana in the same way Georgia is regarded as Georgia. People around America seem fascinated by Louisiana culture, and ULL's nickname captures that best among all the FBS schools.

As for the AAC, as it doesn't seem to be a coincidence that these days all the conferences, including the P ones the AAC looks to for guidance, have even-numbers of teams, it is probably inevitable that we go to 12. But I'm not sure about your idea of quadrupling down on frankenstein by adding one football-only and one rest-of-sports school. We should probably settle on the best available full member, as long as ESPN is willing to go along at full pay.

(07-05-2019 06:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:03 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 09:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Its funny---had Buffalo stayed with their "New York" statewide branding they started in 2013----I wonder if they would be much better positioned in the eyes of ESPN and the AAC. My sense is they would.

Branding only matters if it sticks ... a Buffalo team can claim to be "New York" all it wants, but that won't stick even as far as Albany, never mind downstate.

The AAC will be happy to let the northern border of their conference move to Philadelphia.

Of course. But it takes more than one season to do it. Buffalo walked away from the attempt far too quickly. Like it or hate it---ULL is finally making enough inroads with their attempt to rebrand that its possible that more people now use the new name than the old ULL. lol....I still use ULL---but really only because its quicker to type.

Funny, I was going to say the opposite - to me, the ULL "Louisiana" campaign has been a big failure. Yes, they have managed to convince ESPN and the other networks to use "Louisiana" on their score scrolls, but I'm not sure what impact that has had. I think nobody knows what school that is when they see it, LOL.

Certainly, here in Louisiana, if anything the Rajin Cajun profile has diminished in recent years, as the football team has gone into a slump.

Personally, I've always felt that the RC nickname is distinctive enough that it should be the focus of their branding and marketing, not the vain (in multiple ways) attempt to be regarded as Louisiana in the same way Georgia is regarded as Georgia. People around America seem fascinated by Louisiana culture, and ULL's nickname captures that best among all the FBS schools.

As for the AAC, as it doesn't seem to be a coincidence that these days all the conferences, including the P ones the AAC looks to for guidance, have even-numbers of teams, it is probably inevitable that we go to 12. But I'm not sure about your idea of quadrupling down on frankenstein by adding one football-only and one rest-of-sports school. We should probably settle on the best available full member, as long as ESPN is willing to go along at full pay.

To me, getting stuck with yet another underperforming warm body just to have a round number just seems like an awful idea. The AAC is at a minimum losing the brand value of UConn basketball. It just seems like a wasted opportunity to not at least maximize the ability to improve the on the court/field performance as much as possible. As there is no single school that offers good football and good basketball, adding the best “football only” and the best “non football” member available is the smart route forward. The AAC needs to avoid adding another perennial anchor in either sport. Been there done that.

(07-05-2019 08:29 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 06:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:03 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 09:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Its funny---had Buffalo stayed with their "New York" statewide branding they started in 2013----I wonder if they would be much better positioned in the eyes of ESPN and the AAC. My sense is they would.

Branding only matters if it sticks ... a Buffalo team can claim to be "New York" all it wants, but that won't stick even as far as Albany, never mind downstate.

The AAC will be happy to let the northern border of their conference move to Philadelphia.

Of course. But it takes more than one season to do it. Buffalo walked away from the attempt far too quickly. Like it or hate it---ULL is finally making enough inroads with their attempt to rebrand that its possible that more people now use the new name than the old ULL. lol....I still use ULL---but really only because its quicker to type.

Funny, I was going to say the opposite - to me, the ULL "Louisiana" campaign has been a big failure. Yes, they have managed to convince ESPN and the other networks to use "Louisiana" on their score scrolls, but I'm not sure what impact that has had. I think nobody knows what school that is when they see it, LOL.

Certainly, here in Louisiana, if anything the Rajin Cajun profile has diminished in recent years, as the football team has gone into a slump.

Personally, I've always felt that the RC nickname is distinctive enough that it should be the focus of their branding and marketing, not the vain (in multiple ways) attempt to be regarded as Louisiana in the same way Georgia is regarded as Georgia. People around America seem fascinated by Louisiana culture, and ULL's nickname captures that best among all the FBS schools.

As for the AAC, as it doesn't seem to be a coincidence that these days all the conferences, including the P ones the AAC looks to for guidance, have even-numbers of teams, it is probably inevitable that we go to 12. But I'm not sure about your idea of quadrupling down on frankenstein by adding one football-only and one rest-of-sports school. We should probably settle on the best available full member, as long as ESPN is willing to go along at full pay.

To me, getting stuck with yet another underperforming warm body just to have a round number just seems like an awful idea. The AAC is at a minimum losing the brand value of UConn basketball. It just seems like a wasted opportunity to not at least maximize the ability to improve the on the court/field performance as much as possible. As there is no single school that offers good football and good basketball, adding the best “football only” and the best “non football” member available is the smart route forward. The AAC needs to avoid adding another perennial anchor in either sport. Been there done that.

I'm with ACoog on this. The AAC is not going to get another UConn (in terms of prestige, being a power in men's/women's hoops, major state university, etc.). So if the league could get two universities that bring a certain level of national notoriety and respect ... that cushions the blow of the UConn loss. I'm on record as wanting Army/VCU. However, Army seemingly has zero interest.

So in a bold move ... James Madison for football only and to pair with VCU (for all sports but football). JMU has a $48 million annual athletics budget (very strong for FCS). Enrollment is about 22,000 (very respectable). The endowment is not great (about $100 million) but not horrible. Stadium is small (22,000) but very nice. Many folks have heard of the school (won the FCS title recently) so it brings a certain cache.

On this theme, Old Dominion (C-USA) has tremendous football potential but would it want to parks all its other sports in the CAA with James Madison? Doubtful.

And as I posted yesterday, Colorado State would be a very sold pick. I feel UMass would be too but I don't see that one happening.

For multiple reasons, I don't favor staying at 11. I subscribe to the "there is strength in numbers" rule and 12 is better than 11 (assuming the add(s) make sense and ESPN is on board).

You think the AAAC will be able to renegotiate the length of the contract? 12yrs is absurd.

(07-05-2019 09:04 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 08:29 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 06:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:03 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Branding only matters if it sticks ... a Buffalo team can claim to be "New York" all it wants, but that won't stick even as far as Albany, never mind downstate.

The AAC will be happy to let the northern border of their conference move to Philadelphia.

Of course. But it takes more than one season to do it. Buffalo walked away from the attempt far too quickly. Like it or hate it---ULL is finally making enough inroads with their attempt to rebrand that its possible that more people now use the new name than the old ULL. lol....I still use ULL---but really only because its quicker to type.

Funny, I was going to say the opposite - to me, the ULL "Louisiana" campaign has been a big failure. Yes, they have managed to convince ESPN and the other networks to use "Louisiana" on their score scrolls, but I'm not sure what impact that has had. I think nobody knows what school that is when they see it, LOL.

Certainly, here in Louisiana, if anything the Rajin Cajun profile has diminished in recent years, as the football team has gone into a slump.

Personally, I've always felt that the RC nickname is distinctive enough that it should be the focus of their branding and marketing, not the vain (in multiple ways) attempt to be regarded as Louisiana in the same way Georgia is regarded as Georgia. People around America seem fascinated by Louisiana culture, and ULL's nickname captures that best among all the FBS schools.

As for the AAC, as it doesn't seem to be a coincidence that these days all the conferences, including the P ones the AAC looks to for guidance, have even-numbers of teams, it is probably inevitable that we go to 12. But I'm not sure about your idea of quadrupling down on frankenstein by adding one football-only and one rest-of-sports school. We should probably settle on the best available full member, as long as ESPN is willing to go along at full pay.

To me, getting stuck with yet another underperforming warm body just to have a round number just seems like an awful idea. The AAC is at a minimum losing the brand value of UConn basketball. It just seems like a wasted opportunity to not at least maximize the ability to improve the on the court/field performance as much as possible. As there is no single school that offers good football and good basketball, adding the best “football only” and the best “non football” member available is the smart route forward. The AAC needs to avoid adding another perennial anchor in either sport. Been there done that.

I'm with ACoog on this. The AAC is not going to get another UConn (in terms of prestige, being a power in men's/women's hoops, major state university, etc.). So if the league could get two universities that bring a certain level of national notoriety and respect ... that cushions the blow of the UConn loss. I'm on record as wanting Army/VCU. However, Army seemingly has zero interest.

So in a bold move ... James Madison for football only and to pair with VCU (for all sports but football). JMU has a $48 million annual athletics budget (very strong for FCS). Enrollment is about 22,000 (very respectable). The endowment is not great (about $100 million) but not horrible. Stadium is small (22,000) but very nice. Many folks have heard of the school (won the FCS title recently) so it brings a certain cache.

On this theme, Old Dominion (C-USA) has tremendous football potential but would it want to parks all its other sports in the CAA with James Madison? Doubtful.

And as I posted yesterday, Colorado State would be a very sold pick. I feel UMass would be too but I don't see that one happening.

For multiple reasons, I don't favor staying at 11. I subscribe to the "there is strength in numbers" rule and 12 is better than 11 (assuming the add(s) make sense and ESPN is on board).

JMU straight to the AAC is just not how things work.

AAC's last addition Tulsa had a strong FB/BB track record in CUSA and and a bowl history which includes CFP appearances. Athletic tradition competing on a high level is important to the AAC.

JMU first needs to first find a slot in the SBC then start winning some bowl games before they are in the discussion for a major conference like the AAC.

(07-05-2019 11:03 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  You think the AAAC will be able to renegotiate the length of the contract? 12yrs is absurd.

Just to be clear.

Travel costs aren't going down that much for UConn having to go to Chicago, Omaha, Milwaukee isn't exactly down the street and the AAC has unbalanced schedule in both football and basketball so they aren't travelling country wide (big east women's lacrosse anyone? Denver is way west of Tulsa, Wichita, and Dallas)

This has been debunked so many times. The MAC and CUSA are not going 1.5m in debt to produce Plus content (they get paid 500k). The quotes use old numbers that weren't accurate then and have come down as technology has advanced.

The paywall exists to see FS1 games which is why they get under 100k viewership. Plus is growing and will be the ESPN of streaming.

In the Big East they get 5 women's games and no other 3rd tier rights, for less money.

The 2030s is true and biggest knock on the deal although many conference sign similar length contracts, like I don't know, the Big East? How long was that deal again?


Finally the total propaganda.



This move is about old donors nostalgic view of the Big East and the AAC.

Big East is Syracuse, BC, Pitt and MSG (but really is Butler, Xavier, Marquette, and Creighton)

AAC is CUSA 7.0 (really it's a tweeter in football and a power in basketball despite Memphis and UConn being down).


It means the death of their football program and a permanent ceiling to their basketball programs, there just isn't a lot of growth for small private catholic schools in today's college sports world or a conference dominated by them. With the penalties and long term length of the new deal with the Big East UConn is locked in so there really isn't anything left except the crying.

Sometime in 2021 the old donors will realize this isn't their Big East and the young alumni will see the writing on the wall about what UConn can achieve. By 2023 it will be obvious to even the most die hard Huskies that the older generation of alumni and the exiting administration shanked the kick bad.

(07-05-2019 11:03 AM)TheBasketBallOpinion Wrote:  You think the AAAC will be able to renegotiate the length of the contract? 12yrs is absurd.

Much of this is just flat out incorrect

--the UConn travel cost saving is unknown. Football is the biggest part of travel costs and they dont even know three quarters of their schedule. A third of every season is OOC--thats not changing. MOre than half of the football schedule were all east coast teams--so distances for half the conference football schedule isnt really changing either. The really long football trips to Texas and NOLA? Well, because of divisional travel, UConn only made one (at most 2) football trips to the "west" per year (and one of those "west" trips is actually Navy). Also, we need to stipulate that not like every Big East team is in their backyard. The reality, without even knowing who's on the football schedule--there could be little savings or a lot---who knows?

---2 million in productions costs---already debunked. Closer to $200-300K tops.

---Behind a pay wall---finally something thats true. By the way, FS1 is behind a pay way. Stop paying your cable bill and see how many FS1 games you get to watch.

---No 3rd tier right----Just like the Big East. I invite this moron to go look at the last 2 pages of the Big East contract they just signed. It clearly states that the Big East gets the rights to ALL VARSITY and CLUB level events. ALL means EVERY SINGLE GAME. The only rights UConn retained per the contract is radio rights---and even then---its only local radio rights. The Big East gets the national radio rights.

(07-05-2019 11:22 AM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 09:04 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 08:29 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-05-2019 06:18 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-04-2019 10:21 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Of course. But it takes more than one season to do it. Buffalo walked away from the attempt far too quickly. Like it or hate it---ULL is finally making enough inroads with their attempt to rebrand that its possible that more people now use the new name than the old ULL. lol....I still use ULL---but really only because its quicker to type.

Funny, I was going to say the opposite - to me, the ULL "Louisiana" campaign has been a big failure. Yes, they have managed to convince ESPN and the other networks to use "Louisiana" on their score scrolls, but I'm not sure what impact that has had. I think nobody knows what school that is when they see it, LOL.

Certainly, here in Louisiana, if anything the Rajin Cajun profile has diminished in recent years, as the football team has gone into a slump.

Personally, I've always felt that the RC nickname is distinctive enough that it should be the focus of their branding and marketing, not the vain (in multiple ways) attempt to be regarded as Louisiana in the same way Georgia is regarded as Georgia. People around America seem fascinated by Louisiana culture, and ULL's nickname captures that best among all the FBS schools.

As for the AAC, as it doesn't seem to be a coincidence that these days all the conferences, including the P ones the AAC looks to for guidance, have even-numbers of teams, it is probably inevitable that we go to 12. But I'm not sure about your idea of quadrupling down on frankenstein by adding one football-only and one rest-of-sports school. We should probably settle on the best available full member, as long as ESPN is willing to go along at full pay.

To me, getting stuck with yet another underperforming warm body just to have a round number just seems like an awful idea. The AAC is at a minimum losing the brand value of UConn basketball. It just seems like a wasted opportunity to not at least maximize the ability to improve the on the court/field performance as much as possible. As there is no single school that offers good football and good basketball, adding the best “football only” and the best “non football” member available is the smart route forward. The AAC needs to avoid adding another perennial anchor in either sport. Been there done that.

I'm with ACoog on this. The AAC is not going to get another UConn (in terms of prestige, being a power in men's/women's hoops, major state university, etc.). So if the league could get two universities that bring a certain level of national notoriety and respect ... that cushions the blow of the UConn loss. I'm on record as wanting Army/VCU. However, Army seemingly has zero interest.

So in a bold move ... James Madison for football only and to pair with VCU (for all sports but football). JMU has a $48 million annual athletics budget (very strong for FCS). Enrollment is about 22,000 (very respectable). The endowment is not great (about $100 million) but not horrible. Stadium is small (22,000) but very nice. Many folks have heard of the school (won the FCS title recently) so it brings a certain cache.

On this theme, Old Dominion (C-USA) has tremendous football potential but would it want to parks all its other sports in the CAA with James Madison? Doubtful.

And as I posted yesterday, Colorado State would be a very sold pick. I feel UMass would be too but I don't see that one happening.

For multiple reasons, I don't favor staying at 11. I subscribe to the "there is strength in numbers" rule and 12 is better than 11 (assuming the add(s) make sense and ESPN is on board).

JMU straight to the AAC is just not how things work.

AAC's last addition Tulsa had a strong FB/BB track record in CUSA and and a bowl history which includes CFP appearances. Athletic tradition competing on a high level is important to the AAC.

JMU first needs to first find a slot in the SBC then start winning some bowl games before they are in the discussion for a major conference like the AAC.

Agree fully. My point, made poorly, is that if the AAC wants 12 in football and 12 in hoops and if it cannot get one program that offers both sports, it might have to think outside the box.

JMU is already spending as much on sports as some AAC programs. It would not be a major stretch in every respect — though it would be a stretch in most respects and less than ideal.

Again, there simply aren't many appealing options.

(07-05-2019 02:12 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Agree fully. My point, made poorly, is that if the AAC wants 12 in football and 12 in hoops and if it cannot get one program that offers both sports, it might have to think outside the box.

But as it can't be a "Power" conference, it very much wants to be seen as a "tweener" conference, a step above the balance of the Go5 even as it is a step below the Power 5. And a conference a step above the balance of the Go5 simply does not normally invite an FCS program up ... so doing that is acting suspiciously like "just another Go5 conference".

All of the moves that would be ideal are not available, because if they weren't available when the old Big East still had AQ status, they are not going to be available now. BYU does not want to join a Go5 conference with Utah in a P5 conference ... AF still has no incentive to leave their Front Range rivals for a stepping stone to P5 status when they don't WANT P5 status ... Boise has less reason to move FB only than they did when they reneged on joining the old Big East FB only ... and if there were better all-sports add inside the conference footprint on offer than the ones presently in the AAC, they would have received an invitation last time the AAC was inviting.

So there's a lot to be said for kicking the can down the road and seeing whether any schools have emerged as brighter prospects three years from now.