Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest Dr. Dre

The next TV contract. What will it take to keep the Aztecs?

Recommended Posts

1. I have no idea about the directors cup for 2016-2017. Checking, Boise finished above SDSU for 2015-2016 but SDSU otherwise has finished higher.

2. The directors cup means nothing to anybody except athletic directors and fans of schools which suck at the sports which matter.

3. The TV deal is for football only so the directors cup is irrelevant to this discussion.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dr. Dre
5 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

And in response to the OP...

Image result for who gives a fuck alex jeopardy

You'll give one when we're gone and you're stuck with a contract paying 500k per year with SJSU and Utah State as conference partners

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

It's disconcerting to think that you probably are licensed to drive on public roads...

PAC-12 can certainly stay at 12, and even if they add Texas, they can proceed forward with 13 teams. They will not dilute their brand with schools that don't meet their brand's criteria. UNLV and SDSU aren't even in sniffing distance. In fact, academically, there are at least three or four members that would rank ahead of both schools vis a vis PAC standards...

Wrong. There is just one, CSU, and since Fort Collins is basically a burb of Denver which CU already brings the Pac, CSU isn't going there.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple.  SDSU uses the same "negotiating " technique they're using for the Qualcomm land; tell all of the networks what SDSU is demanding for payment and threaten to quit football if they don't pony up. 8 mil per home game should do it.

“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

-Richard Feynman

"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."

-P.J. O’Rourke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Wyobraska said:

Hate to say it but the new TV deal isn't going to pay anything substantial with the current TV climate.  The MW also picked the worst time to take a collective dump in both sports.  The conference is going to the negotiating table with little to offer and no excitement or momentum as a brand.  If SDSU or anyone has better options you can't fault that school for doing what is best for them.  The Boise deal needs to be removed though.  

i'm not worried about the tv deal cause what I seen was that the conference was going to tell espn and CBS no and just move the games to the mwc streaming website.  the feeling is that the games start too late and fans can make it i  think this new streaming deal would make watching games better. it is hard for wyoming fans to make late games

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, wyochris said:

i'm not worried about the tv deal cause what I seen was that the conference was going to tell espn and CBS no and just move the games to the mwc streaming website.  the feeling is that the games start too late and fans can make it i  think this new streaming deal would make watching games better. it is hard for wyoming fans to make late games

we are all dead in the water if that happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious where SDSU is going to get leverage in this. Independence isn't an option, or at least a good option. BYU has said is is unsustainable in the long term and even Norte Dame is essentially moving into the ACC. SDSU doesn't have nearly as strong a following as BYU and is light years behind another Dame. Without a real, viable alternative the MWC isn't going to bend over backwards to keep SDSU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, wyochris said:

i'm not worried about the tv deal cause what I seen was that the conference was going to tell espn and CBS no and just move the games to the mwc streaming website.  the feeling is that the games start too late and fans can make it i  think this new streaming deal would make watching games better. it is hard for wyoming fans to make late games

I like that the games are at better times with a streaming deal, but the money and exposure does worry me.  Without games on ESPN or some national TV will even less people know about the MW?  The MW has always had an exposure problem and going streaming only will only exacerbate the problem.  

Will gameday revenue replace the lost TV revenue? I don't think so.  With the state of Wyoming cutting budgets, money will become tight and pennies will be pinched.  With a smaller budget will Wyoming be able to remain competitive in the MW?  Wyoming is just now fielding a competitive football team that is sustainable for the first time in a long time.  The money needs to be there to sustain that.  

TV is kind of unknown at this point but a streaming only deal makes me extremely nervous.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Wrong. There is just one, CSU, and since Fort Collins is basically a burb of Denver which CU already brings the Pac, CSU isn't going there.

Wrong? No. SDSU may have moved ahead of Wyoming (among others) on USNWR rankings, but Forbes has us practically tied (Wyoming is ranked just ahead). When you consider the USNWR rankings, Wyoming, CSEwe, SDSU, and UNM, are all pretty much clustered together with the only real distinctions arising when you zoom in. UNM has a med and law school, CSEwe has its Vet school, Wyoming has a law school. Wyoming's research expenditure per student is nearly twice SDSU's. There's also a matter of endowment. And if you don't think endowment counts, compare SDSU's to the rest of the MWC and then to the PAC-12. Your endowment is half that of Wyoming's. Most of the PAC-12's are in the Billionaires Club...

Image result for h.l. mencken quotes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HoosierRebel said:

I'm curious where SDSU is going to get leverage in this. Independence isn't an option, or at least a good option. BYU has said is is unsustainable in the long term and even Norte Dame is essentially moving into the ACC. SDSU doesn't have nearly as strong a following as BYU and is light years behind another Dame. Without a real, viable alternative the MWC isn't going to bend over backwards to keep SDSU.

That's the point, they have no leverage. It's negotiating 101. Unless you have a better option, you have no option.

Image result for h.l. mencken quotes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr. Dre said:

Wow? Kinda like crowning Josh Allen for president of the world? This is a laughable post coming from the likes of you. Negotiations will start sooner than you think, but, I can save you the suspense and tell you exactly what this conference will be offered the next go around- peanuts 

This is the harsh reality that a lot of people on here ignore.  

We are headed for C-USA type TV dollars.  Especially with IDIOT Thompson at the table.

Been saying this for a couple years now but the WAC backfill and wyoming think everything is peachy.  I want out of this conference and in a BOR with Big 12 leftovers which could be anywhere from 6-8 schools along with SDSU, UNM, AF and possibly BYU even though I can't stand BYU I would take them.

Finished stadium 2017B.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, wyochris said:

i'm not worried about the tv deal cause what I seen was that the conference was going to tell espn and CBS no and just move the games to the mwc streaming website.  the feeling is that the games start too late and fans can make it i  think this new streaming deal would make watching games better. it is hard for wyoming fans to make late games

Death sentence..

Finished stadium 2017B.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ph90702 said:

I actually think San Diego State and UNLV are both strong candidates for the PAC.  I don't see Oklahoma or Texas happening.  Oklahoma is likely headed to the SEC, and Texas will just do independent because they want to keep the Longhorn Network.

:rotflmfao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Scooter said:

This is the harsh reality that a lot of people on here ignore.  

We are headed for C-USA type TV dollars.  Especially with IDIOT Thompson at the table.

Been saying this for a couple years now but the WAC backfill and wyoming think everything is peachy.  I want out of this conference and in a BOR with Big 12 leftovers which could be anywhere from 6-8 schools along with SDSU, UNM, AF and possibly BYU even though I can't stand BYU I would take them.

That's the best any of us can likely hope for. But we're 8 years away from that even being a possibility. ESPN will be dead as we know it during that time period, possibly even satellite/cable TV in general, so it's pretty much impossible to read the tea-leaves at this point in time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr. Dre said:

Yes I do. Lots of alumni starting to see the light. And now it's reached the airwaves. I think they are SERIOUSLY considering it. It really is a no-brainer when considering the alternative of staying here.

 

WATCH OUT!!!  "It's reached the airwaves."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

Wrong? No. SDSU may have moved ahead of Wyoming (among others) on USNWR rankings, but Forbes has us practically tied (Wyoming is ranked just ahead). When you consider the USNWR rankings, Wyoming, CSEwe, SDSU, and UNM, are all pretty much clustered together with the only real distinctions arising when you zoom in. UNM has a med and law school, CSEwe has its Vet school, Wyoming has a law school. Wyoming's research expenditure per student is nearly twice SDSU's. There's also a matter of endowment. And if you don't think endowment counts, compare SDSU's to the rest of the MWC and then to the PAC-12. Your endowment is half that of Wyoming's. Most of the PAC-12's are in the Billionaires Club...

That's the first time I've ever seen anyone use the metric of research expenditure per student. Indeed, I'm not even sure what that means.

Bigger endowment? Check and that isn't something which is going to change. Med, vet and law schools? Check, however, if SDSU could extricate itself from the CSU system that would change. I can't see SDSU ever having a med school, that's just too costly. However Cal Western Law School in SD is currently privately owned and has been having financial problems so there's a good chance somebody will buy it. Right now you would think that would be UCSD but just how many law schools does that system need? As to a vet school, I recently discovered somebody recently started a podunk one affiliated with Cal Poly Pomona. The only vet school in California anybody's heard of is at UCSD so there's obviously a need for a legitimate one in SoCal. Does the one at Pomona suffice? Not according to my friend who went to vet school at Davis.

The longer the implosion of the B12 takes and the more big boys which leave - and the writing is on the wall that at lease Oklahoma and Kansas will bolt - the greater SDSU's chances of being offered admission to a realigned version of that conference. Getting in there would enhance SDSU's chances of Pac admission if the higher caliber of competition meant that the Pac began becoming irrelevant to San Diegans.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ph90702 said:

Guess who doesn't have those hurdles?

 

Hahahaha.  Despite a Law School & a future Med School, your academics still blow.

Explain away your "Rank Not Published" ranking by US News & World Reports.

 

Tell us about your Endowment & Research Budgets...

 

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/unlv-2569/overall-rankings

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, wyochris said:

i'm not worried about the tv deal cause what I seen was that the conference was going to tell espn and CBS no and just move the games to the mwc streaming website.

Yeah that would make sense. Cuz we all want to earn about $500 a year in broadcast revenue.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

He made it sound like Boise is only football.  We have one of the healthier all around athletic departments in conference and the most valuable football brand, even still.

The issue here is TV value and the directors cup standings are totally irrelevant to that.

Nationally, your school has some TV value only because of your underdog rep in upsetting big boys. Obviously that will cease to exist if you can't dominate the MWC to give you a chance to play them. The Boise metro area is not heavily populated. (Pleeeze don't try to say that's not true because Boise has half a million people. That just makes you a middling city.) Not too long ago Southern Miss ran off a streak of 10 consecutive bowl games but after several bad seasons they now can't even get out of a devastated CUSA. Why? Because there are only 150K people in the Hattiesburg metro area.

A MLB pre-season mag I bought ranked the momentum of teams with arrows pointing up, sideways and down. If such a mag was published for the MWC, SDSU's arrow would be pointed up and Boise's would be pointed sideways.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...