(01-10-2020 02:47 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  Football (not including Hawaii's local telecasts)

Total Linear Exposure
American - minimum 44 games
MWC - minimum 39 games

Tier One
American - minimum 20 games on ABC, ESPN or ESPN2
MWC - minimum 10 games on CBS, FOX or FS1

Tier Two
American - minimum 20 games on ESPNU, 4-5 Navy games on CBSSN
MWC - minimum 29 games on CBSSN, FS2

Streaming
American - the rest on ESPN+
MWC - 10 games on CBSSN All Access

Title Game
American - ABC or ESPN
MWC - Fox or FS1

Basketball

Total Linear Exposure
American - minimum 65 games
MWC - minimum 48 games

Tier One
American - minimum 25 games on ESPN or ESPN2
MWC - minimum 14 games on CBS, Fox or FS1

Tier Two
American - minimum 40 games on ESPNU
MWC - minimum 34 games on CBSSN, FS2

Streaming
American - the rest on ESPN+
MWC - 10 games on CBSS All Access

Tournament
American - semis on ESPN, ESPN2 or ESPNU, finals on ESPN
MWC - semis on CBSSN, finals on CBS

Women's Basketball
American - minimum 5 games on ESPN/ESPN2; minimum 8 games on ESPNU; rest on ESPN+. Tournament on ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU.
MWC - nothing announced

Olympic Sports
American - minimum 5 games on ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU. More on ESPN+
MWC - nothing announced

Rights Fees
American - $83.3M/year * 12 years
MWC - $45M/year * 6 years

Easy to include the AAC-CBSSN deal for Navy home games...did it for you in Tier Two and Total Linear

This no doubt is a good deal for MWC. It makes them king of G4. It is about a Mil more than I expected. Main thing in the end is we will still have the overall budgets to slowly maintain the crawl away from them, though this deal keeps them in the game.

One thing this deal does do, is make it harder to get a MWC team to jump.

This looks like the better thread with specifics coming into view.
Cross-posting myself:


This is a great deal for the mwc overall.
- They definitely got paid. They continue (2019 ratings numbers) to get about 30% of the AAC's viewers and got around 50% of the $$$
- Exposure - OTA and top cable linear (ESPN, ESPN2, FS1) better than they were, and approaching the linear exposure we were happy about in the AAC - ESPN deal. Time will tell how many of even BSU get Fox vs FS1 etc.
- And they did it in a shorter timeframe than the AAC 12-year deal. I remain pro- the AAC deal, but my biggest reservation was that I would have preferred 8 or even 10 years to the 12 year deal - not least because 8 years / 2028 seemed the sweet spot to capitalize on the next restructure.

Caveats on the mwc declaring victory:
- Can't wait for the mwc fans' tortuous logic that $3.5M = $7M
- They still have late kicks for that money. Remember all the unhappiness that 8pm-11pm in the mountains in October-November hurt ticket sales? On balance the money makes sense (when your average attendance is 20k, you need an earlier kickoff time to bring a sustained increase of 25%-30% ticket sales to offset a million dollars in TV revenue) but there are medium to longterm effects.
- Streaming is IN PLAY for the mwc...waiting for revisionism on the (admittedly disproven) $2M production costs.
- Still have money distribution inequities. Right below the self-congratulatory thread on the mwc board is a slightly less active thread bitching about Boise's sweetheart deal.

So let's see this coming season what actually gets on what networks, in what timeslots, and what ratings numbers they get, and what attendance is, and what gets streamed.

Can't wait to get that Boise vs Nevada game at 10:15 EST on FS1!

It's too bad half of TV viewers don't know what FS1 is or where to find it.

Could one of you AAC fans break down the AAC's yearly payout per team? Doesn't it ramp up each year of the 12 year deal? How does the AAC's 2020-2026 yearly payout compare to the MWC's $3.8 million?

I'm glad ESPN is losing the MWC. There's 9 games in timeslots that could work for SBC teams on Friday and Saturdays.

(01-09-2020 11:28 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 11:09 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  .
As I stated in another thread... Time for top tier of AAC to get on the phone with Thompson

whats the obsession with the MW or any other G4?

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

Please explain what you meant by writing: "Time for top tier of AAC to get on the phone with Thompson." Inquiring readers want to know...

When you wrote that there is an obsession with the MW, you seemed to be contradicting yourself, since you've been pretty gung-ho about adding a MWC team.

Are you waffling, or was the word "obsession" just a form of sarcasm?


Because the fans here are obsessed with getting any number of the MWC schools even though they are G4.
Even Hawaii Bawhahaha

There are a lot of reasons why fans are a bit preoccupied with the topic.

The main reason is that the only FB schools that could improve AAC FB
significantly are the top tier MWC FB schools.

The derision targeted toward the G4 seems to be off base, since there are a number of G4 teams that are as good as, or better than, half of the teams in the AAC.

Moreover, even the dozens of non-P5 and non-G5 BB/olympic conferences have some teams (e.g., Gonzaga men's basketball) that are highly competitive with the majority of AAC BB teams.

Further, P5 and Big East teams are defeated every season by lower-seeded teams from obscure conferences, even in the NCAA and NIT tournaments.

For that matter, it isn't unheard of for well-regarded P5 FB teams to lose to FCS teams. Michigan's loss to App State a number of years ago springs to mind, but there are many other examples.

The AAC is not high and mighty. There's no place for hubris.

But yeah, the AAC is a pretty terrific place to be.

(01-10-2020 09:20 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 11:28 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 11:09 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  .
As I stated in another thread... Time for top tier of AAC to get on the phone with Thompson

whats the obsession with the MW or any other G4?

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

Please explain what you meant by writing: "Time for top tier of AAC to get on the phone with Thompson." Inquiring readers want to know...

When you wrote that there is an obsession with the MW, you seemed to be contradicting yourself, since you've been pretty gung-ho about adding a MWC team.

Are you waffling, or was the word "obsession" just a form of sarcasm?


Because the fans here are obsessed with getting any number of the MWC schools even though they are G4.
Even Hawaii Bawhahaha

There are a lot of reasons why fans are a bit preoccupied with the topic.

The main reason is that the only FB schools that could improve AAC FB
significantly are the top tier MWC FB schools.

The derision targeted toward the G4 seems to be off base, since there are a number of G4 teams that are as good as, or better than, half of the teams in the AAC.

Moreover, even the dozens of non-P5 and non-G5 BB/olympic conferences have some teams (e.g., Gonzaga men's basketball) that are highly competitive with the majority of AAC BB teams.

Further, P5 and Big East teams are defeated every season by lower-seeded teams from obscure conferences, even in the NCAA and NIT tournaments.

For that matter, it isn't unheard of for well-regarded P5 FB teams to lose to FCS teams. Michigan's loss to App State a number of years ago springs to mind, but there are many other examples.

The AAC is not high and mighty. There's no place for hubris.

But yeah, the AAC is a pretty terrific place to be.

Very well put, Jed. I appreciate your being a voice of reason, fairness and specificity.

If I were the MWC, I would be worried about ESPN choking the conference out.

When yo really dig deep in their contract, it sucks a bag of dicks.

They are getting half as much per team and the overwhelming majority of their content is on networks that are hardly watched.

On paper they are getting a lot of games on tv, but who cares when nobody is watching the channel.

Now, just to be fun.... we should take Air Force and watch it BURN!

(01-10-2020 10:06 AM)Z-Fly Wrote:  If I were the MWC, I would be worried about ESPN choking the conference out.

My thoughts exactly but I wonder how hard espn will hit them, and risk damaging their ugly step child BSU?

(01-10-2020 09:09 AM)Yosef Himself Wrote:  Could one of you AAC fans break down the AAC's yearly payout per team? Doesn't it ramp up each year of the 12 year deal? How does the AAC's 2020-2026 yearly payout compare to the MWC's $3.8 million?

I'm glad ESPN is losing the MWC. There's 9 games in timeslots that could work for SBC teams on Friday and Saturdays.

we get about 6.9...itll ramp up but its unlikely to be drastic drastic, maybe something like 6 in front 8 in the back

mwc also isn't 3.8, its uneven sharing with the divide unknown...someone on the MWC forum said sdsu's president said they expect 3.3mil but i cant find their source

(01-10-2020 09:20 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 11:28 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 11:09 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  .
As I stated in another thread... Time for top tier of AAC to get on the phone with Thompson

whats the obsession with the MW or any other G4?

Jedidiah Clampett's reply:

Please explain what you meant by writing: "Time for top tier of AAC to get on the phone with Thompson." Inquiring readers want to know...

When you wrote that there is an obsession with the MW, you seemed to be contradicting yourself, since you've been pretty gung-ho about adding a MWC team.

Are you waffling, or was the word "obsession" just a form of sarcasm?


Because the fans here are obsessed with getting any number of the MWC schools even though they are G4.
Even Hawaii Bawhahaha

There are a lot of reasons why fans are a bit preoccupied with the topic.

The main reason is that the only FB schools that could improve AAC FB
significantly are the top tier MWC FB schools.

The derision targeted toward the G4 seems to be off base, since there are a number of G4 teams that are as good as, or better than, half of the teams in the AAC.

Moreover, even the dozens of non-P5 and non-G5 BB/olympic conferences have some teams (e.g., Gonzaga men's basketball) that are highly competitive with the majority of AAC BB teams.

Further, P5 and Big East teams are defeated every season by lower-seeded teams from obscure conferences, even in the NCAA and NIT tournaments.

For that matter, it isn't unheard of for well-regarded P5 FB teams to lose to FCS teams. Michigan's loss to App State a number of years ago springs to mind, but there are many other examples.

The AAC is not high and mighty. There's no place for hubris.

But yeah, the AAC is a pretty terrific place to be.

IMO, The “G4” narrative is a pushback to past trolling, mocking, and scorn directed by certain rude guests on this AAC dedicated site toward the AAC and AAC members. Their refusal to acknowledge the AAC as the tallest Lilliputian leaves them open to returned fire.

(01-09-2020 10:20 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 05:12 PM)pesik Wrote:  bombshell

So the other Mountain West programs are pissed. A signal from the Mountain West commissioner to those programs to hold tight for 6 years.

If I'm running the MWC, the only school that I'd care about pissing off is Boise State. As much as the other schools may not like the unequal revenue distribution, the fact of the matter is that their conference revenue would be significantly less without Boise State in their league. Boise State could conceivably go independent or as a football-only to the AAC if the rest of the MWC pushes too hard. Granted, if the next MWC contract provides a great equal revenue distribution, then that's less of an issue for Boise State.

anyone know what is happening with us and cbssport

we currently have a sublicensed package with cbs ...that hasnt been renewed yet

aresco hinted he prefered espn+ to cbssn, and liked the idea of everything aac all under one roof...but hinted he wanted to renew the CBS OTAs...
on cbs side...why would they give us cbs OTAs without putting something on cbssn...something to note is that cbs hasnt given away our cbssn slots....

this is the exact same amount of cbssn game from the old MWC deal to this one .. they have added no other major content at all..and had the ability to take a ton more MWC but didnt

(01-09-2020 05:36 PM)justin_sane15 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 05:12 PM)pesik Wrote:  bombshell

If they're that sure enough of that already, why even negotiate them separately at all? They have nowhere else to go. Blackballed by the AAC. Other G4 conferences are below them. PAC 12 wouldn't be interested. Big 12 isn't expanding anytime soon. No other conference makes sense. They should've played hardball.

I do not think Boise St is permanently barred from joining the AAC. Money has a way of smoothing troubled waters and under the right terms all will be forgiven, IMO.

We saw what happened when CUSA left ESPN. ESPN never forgave the league and in part has brought about its demise. ESPN will now imo, do whatever it can to shore up its loss of the MWC. More coverage for AAC? More money? Whatever it is, the corporate climate at ESPN is winner take all.

In long run this imo is not good for MWC as it cuts the schools off from ESPN. THe MWC cannot afford to lose the cache of ESPN nor its far reaching influence in sports.

If I was a betting man, I would bet that this is the beginning of the MWC as we know it.

(01-10-2020 11:31 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  We saw what happened when CUSA left ESPN. ESPN never forgave the league and in part has brought about its demise. ESPN will now imo, do whatever it can to shore up its loss of the MWC. More coverage for AAC? More money? Whatever it is, the corporate climate at ESPN is winner take all.

In long run this imo is not good for MWC as it cuts the schools off from ESPN. THe MWC cannot afford to lose the cache of ESPN nor its far reaching influence in sports.

If I was a betting man, I would bet that this is the beginning of the MWC as we know it.

I'd bet that, with the SEC coming back in the fold, they will be eating up more of the newly vacated evening timeslots than we will. I don't think anyone wants the 10:30's, however.

(01-10-2020 08:55 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  This looks like the better thread with specifics coming into view.
Cross-posting myself:


This is a great deal for the mwc overall.
- They definitely got paid. They continue (2019 ratings numbers) to get about 30% of the AAC's viewers and got around 50% of the $$$
- Exposure - OTA and top cable linear (ESPN, ESPN2, FS1) better than they were, and approaching the linear exposure we were happy about in the AAC - ESPN deal. Time will tell how many of even BSU get Fox vs FS1 etc.
- And they did it in a shorter timeframe than the AAC 12-year deal. I remain pro- the AAC deal, but my biggest reservation was that I would have preferred 8 or even 10 years to the 12 year deal - not least because 8 years / 2028 seemed the sweet spot to capitalize on the next restructure.

Caveats on the mwc declaring victory:
- Can't wait for the mwc fans' tortuous logic that $3.5M = $7M
- They still have late kicks for that money. Remember all the unhappiness that 8pm-11pm in the mountains in October-November hurt ticket sales? On balance the money makes sense (when your average attendance is 20k, you need an earlier kickoff time to bring a sustained increase of 25%-30% ticket sales to offset a million dollars in TV revenue) but there are medium to longterm effects.
- Streaming is IN PLAY for the mwc...waiting for revisionism on the (admittedly disproven) $2M production costs.
- Still have money distribution inequities. Right below the self-congratulatory thread on the mwc board is a slightly less active thread bitching about Boise's sweetheart deal.

So let's see this coming season what actually gets on what networks, in what timeslots, and what ratings numbers they get, and what attendance is, and what gets streamed.

They got paid okay, but from an exposure standpoint, they just jumped into the Bermuda Triangle, never to be seen again.

(01-10-2020 01:07 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(01-10-2020 08:55 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  This looks like the better thread with specifics coming into view.
Cross-posting myself:


This is a great deal for the mwc overall.
- They definitely got paid. They continue (2019 ratings numbers) to get about 30% of the AAC's viewers and got around 50% of the $$$
- Exposure - OTA and top cable linear (ESPN, ESPN2, FS1) better than they were, and approaching the linear exposure we were happy about in the AAC - ESPN deal. Time will tell how many of even BSU get Fox vs FS1 etc.
- And they did it in a shorter timeframe than the AAC 12-year deal. I remain pro- the AAC deal, but my biggest reservation was that I would have preferred 8 or even 10 years to the 12 year deal - not least because 8 years / 2028 seemed the sweet spot to capitalize on the next restructure.

Caveats on the mwc declaring victory:
- Can't wait for the mwc fans' tortuous logic that $3.5M = $7M
- They still have late kicks for that money. Remember all the unhappiness that 8pm-11pm in the mountains in October-November hurt ticket sales? On balance the money makes sense (when your average attendance is 20k, you need an earlier kickoff time to bring a sustained increase of 25%-30% ticket sales to offset a million dollars in TV revenue) but there are medium to longterm effects.
- Streaming is IN PLAY for the mwc...waiting for revisionism on the (admittedly disproven) $2M production costs.
- Still have money distribution inequities. Right below the self-congratulatory thread on the mwc board is a slightly less active thread bitching about Boise's sweetheart deal.

So let's see this coming season what actually gets on what networks, in what timeslots, and what ratings numbers they get, and what attendance is, and what gets streamed.

They got paid okay, but from an exposure standpoint, they just jumped into the Bermuda Triangle, never to be seen again.

It's not THAT bad. CUSA is Bermuda Triangle. MWC is across the bridge in New Jersey.

(01-09-2020 10:59 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 04:37 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  MWC Finalizes TV Deal

Not bad at all.

Excerpt:

Quote:The Mountain West Conference has finalized new media agreements with CBS Sports and Fox that will pay the conference $270M over six years. The $45M per-year average is three times more than what the MWC made previously in its deals with CBS and ESPN.

I'll leave it to you guys to pick it apart.

P7

It’s definitely a good deal for the mw. Only 6 years, no production costs and retaining t3 rights is definitely a plus. I would say when it’s all said and done aac schools will still make more but in 6 years when the mw renegotiates who knows.