All of this enthusiasm & talk that "now we can get MWC schools" - why would we want them? It just places a scheduling burden on current AAC schools & will likely dilute revenue. WE NEED 0-1 SCHOOL & preferably one east of the MS river that plays competitive FB & BB. Rule #! - don't add anyone that doesn't bring added value.

I could see SDSU as a football only adding value.

I am not sure they were want to guarantee 4 long road flights a year but they seemed willing to do it when it was the Big East.

They are already an associate member with Rowing.

(12-16-2019 11:38 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Jay Tust

@KTVBSportsGuy
UPDATE regarding the potential new MW television deal that was reported earlier tonight...

From the @MountainWest:

“The story is inaccurate as reported. No deal has been signed by any party and negotiations are ongoing.”

No Deal has been "signed." Weasel tweet weasel words.

If the reports are accurate, then it looks like each team will get around $3.5 million. Hawaii and Boise St have seperate deals, so it would be $35 million divided by 10 teams. Honestly, its more than I thought they would get but I do wonder what the hangup is.

If I am the AAC and want to poach a member, now is the time. If it hasnt been signed yet, then the exit fees will not be enforceable.

This also has me questioning Boise States setup. They are essentially an independent that is in a conference. Their deal will be with ESPN and yet the entire conference is with CBS and Fox.

So the ranking of G5s is about complete. teh AAC is by far the top, MWC second, MAC third, CUSA, and then Sunbelt (based on per team value of the contract)

Now that we see the disparity in pay and assumed value, can we please stop with the MAC, CUSA and Sunbelt teams being expansion candidates. They were dumb ideas before and are even dumber now that we know actual value of all teams available. the closest is the MWC and its roughly half the value, except Boise St.

(12-17-2019 08:42 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 11:38 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Jay Tust

@KTVBSportsGuy
UPDATE regarding the potential new MW television deal that was reported earlier tonight...

From the @MountainWest:

“The story is inaccurate as reported. No deal has been signed by any party and negotiations are ongoing.”

No Deal has been "signed." Weasel tweet weasel words.

OTHO, Dodd (who is usually well connected) tweeted "I'm told by sources late Monday the @MountainWest deal is not done, and that the terms stated are "not close'. Stay tuned."

(12-17-2019 09:11 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 08:42 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 11:38 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Jay Tust

@KTVBSportsGuy
UPDATE regarding the potential new MW television deal that was reported earlier tonight...

From the @MountainWest:

“The story is inaccurate as reported. No deal has been signed by any party and negotiations are ongoing.”

No Deal has been "signed." Weasel tweet weasel words.

OTHO, Dodd (who is usually well connected) tweeted "I'm told by sources late Monday the @MountainWest deal is not done, and that the terms stated are "not close'. Stay tuned."

I'm guessing that the "deal" leaked out was the MWC starting point and they've had to negotiate down from there....

(12-16-2019 09:51 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 09:29 PM)Out West Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 09:16 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 09:12 PM)Out West Wrote:  Why join AAC if it is perceived that AAC might lost a team or teams to B12? The B12 contract has to play out and renewed without any B12 expansion before the AAC is in a position to attract BYU or a MWC school. My guess is AAC stays at 11 teams for the next six years or so.

The AAC has a waiver for only two years and an extension is unlikely. The AAC will probably be forced to add a football team.

Some help please on this! I think it was posted on this board that AAC could play with 11 teams with two divisions, one with 6 teams and one with 5 teams, and still have a conference championship game. Is this correct?

Scheduling in this 5/6 divisional setup would probably not be any worse than scheduling no divisions 11 team AAC. The Sun Belt has two divisions of 5 teams as a reference.

... the AAC could stay with its present 11-team membership, in divisions of 6 and 5 teams, and play a divisional round robin and have a CCG between the two division winners. The challenge there is that you can't build a schedule with 11 teams having 8 conference games each: you could have two teams play 7 and nine teams play 8, or two teams play 9 and nine teams play 8.

It's not just hard in terms of fitting the puzzle pieces together. It's uneven and just sloppy, with the possibility of division standings or CCG host being decided between 7-1/6-1 teams or 6-2/5-2 teams.

The tension is so thick at this point, with so many players involved, that you could cut it with a knife.

If I could tap one person's phone right about now, it would be Mike Aresco's.

(12-16-2019 07:35 PM)spenser Wrote:  Expect ESPN to now pitch us a good number to take one of their better teams as number 12. That way ESPN can control their rights, without paying for the lesser teams, and weakening FS1 and CBS.

Air Force or Colorado State, who does ESPN want to take Uconns spot. A full share doubles their pay, but ESPN could really tank FS1 and MWC by taking multiple and having them take a phases in starting at 75% share and 25% going to the AAC.

Does ESPN care that much?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

So has anyone perused the MWC boards to get a sense of how fans are receiving the numbers (assuming they are close to correct)?

(12-17-2019 09:48 AM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 07:35 PM)spenser Wrote:  Expect ESPN to now pitch us a good number to take one of their better teams as number 12. That way ESPN can control their rights, without paying for the lesser teams, and weakening FS1 and CBS.

Air Force or Colorado State, who does ESPN want to take Uconns spot. A full share doubles their pay, but ESPN could really tank FS1 and MWC by taking multiple and having them take a phases in starting at 75% share and 25% going to the AAC.

Does ESPN care that much?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Does ESPN care that much?

Do bears hibernate in January?

Do bats fly at night?

Do the swallows return to Capistrano?

(12-17-2019 09:48 AM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 07:35 PM)spenser Wrote:  Expect ESPN to now pitch us a good number to take one of their better teams as number 12. That way ESPN can control their rights, without paying for the lesser teams, and weakening FS1 and CBS.

Air Force or Colorado State, who does ESPN want to take Uconns spot. A full share doubles their pay, but ESPN could really tank FS1 and MWC by taking multiple and having them take a phases in starting at 75% share and 25% going to the AAC.

Does ESPN care that much?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

ESPN is like the mob. A good analogy would be a young, new mobster skimming a little extra from the take. Does the Godfather care that much? Maybe not, it's not much money.

But the young mobster gets whacked to make a point to the rest. Don't cross us.

I am less optimistic that the MWC deal will really be a factor in any MWC team defecting to the AAC. We have not seen any real interest... nothing has leaked. Only BYU telling us to pound sand, and pretty much silence everywhere else. We don't have P5 dollars to lure anyone. Is a few million really enough to get a western team to join an eastern conference? With the headaches of finding another home for all the other sports?

That said, my hope is AFA and done. Makes so much sense, with Navy already onboard, having success here, and our most loyal member in terms of vocal support for the AAC.

Put the dagger in:

West:
SMU
Houston
Tulsa
Colorado State
Boise State
Tulane
Air Force

East:
Temple
Navy
UCF
USF
East Carolina
Cincinnati
Memphis

San Diego State in the West with all their other sports in the WAC wouldn't be terrible for them. The WAC already has New Mexico State so they would have an instant rival competing at the top.

(12-17-2019 08:18 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  All of this enthusiasm & talk that "now we can get MWC schools" - why would we want them? It just places a scheduling burden on current AAC schools & will likely dilute revenue. WE NEED 0-1 SCHOOL & preferably one east of the MS river that plays competitive FB & BB. Rule #! - don't add anyone that doesn't bring added value.

MW schools are more interesting because the theoretical eastern candidate you mention that is good at basketball AND football AND adds value—-simply doesn’t exist. The closest thing to what you are looking for is the hybrid addition of Army+VCU...but Army is not interested.

(12-17-2019 09:37 AM)8BitPirate Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:11 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 08:42 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 11:38 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Jay Tust

@KTVBSportsGuy
UPDATE regarding the potential new MW television deal that was reported earlier tonight...

From the @MountainWest:

“The story is inaccurate as reported. No deal has been signed by any party and negotiations are ongoing.”

No Deal has been "signed." Weasel tweet weasel words.

OTHO, Dodd (who is usually well connected) tweeted "I'm told by sources late Monday the @MountainWest deal is not done, and that the terms stated are "not close'. Stay tuned."

I'm guessing that the "deal" leaked out was the MWC starting point and they've had to negotiate down from there....

Could be, the first figure leaked by the SBJ was $10M with a GOR for the AAC contract. One thing's for sure, it'll eventually be known.

Seems like a catch 22 for the bidders... you want the product as cheap as possible, but in the process you are essentially devaluing the product by bidding low.

Except the average ticket buying fan probably does not know or care about the value of the TV contract.

(12-17-2019 10:03 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:48 AM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 07:35 PM)spenser Wrote:  Expect ESPN to now pitch us a good number to take one of their better teams as number 12. That way ESPN can control their rights, without paying for the lesser teams, and weakening FS1 and CBS.

Air Force or Colorado State, who does ESPN want to take Uconns spot. A full share doubles their pay, but ESPN could really tank FS1 and MWC by taking multiple and having them take a phases in starting at 75% share and 25% going to the AAC.

Does ESPN care that much?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Does ESPN care that much?

Do bears hibernate in January?

Do bats fly at night?

Do the swallows return to Capistrano?

Just saying, the tenor of this thread is that ESPN really really cares about wanting an AAC football #12 and that this MWC contract will be the trigger for them to assemble in their war room. I'm thinking...no?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(12-17-2019 11:22 AM)panama Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 10:03 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(12-17-2019 09:48 AM)panama Wrote:  

(12-16-2019 07:35 PM)spenser Wrote:  Expect ESPN to now pitch us a good number to take one of their better teams as number 12. That way ESPN can control their rights, without paying for the lesser teams, and weakening FS1 and CBS.

Air Force or Colorado State, who does ESPN want to take Uconns spot. A full share doubles their pay, but ESPN could really tank FS1 and MWC by taking multiple and having them take a phases in starting at 75% share and 25% going to the AAC.

Does ESPN care that much?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Does ESPN care that much?

Do bears hibernate in January?

Do bats fly at night?

Do the swallows return to Capistrano?

Just saying, the tenor of this thread is that ESPN really really cares about wanting an AAC football #12 and that this MWC contract will be the trigger for them to assemble in their war room. I'm thinking...no?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

The Mouse is very interested in neutralizing rivals , especially in the cord cutting environment. It will not take much effort or expense to cut MWC's throat and hobble Fox.