Jump to content

Archived

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

k5james

The AAC has officially left us in the dust

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, pesik said:

how was our bowl line up not good last year?

-champion vs local p5

-#2 vs sec 

-houston (#6 aac) vs MWC Champion

-memphis (#5) vs c-usa champion

-ucf (#7) vs sunbelt champion

-and navy vs the #2 c-usa (navy was without qb in the game)

we had 1 bad bowl 

that isnt a bad lineup...and what does record have to do with bowl line up????..that is stupid rebuttal in a argument about quality of bowl. that is a meaningless manipulative point. anyone with any smarts can see right through...the big 10 has only had 1 winning bowl record the last decade (by far the worst p5 bowl record)..yet they also have the best bowl line up..better bowls equals harder opponents..equals worse records....

what cycle are you making up? laso the last 2 mwc champs before this year *cough sdsu *cough..lost to south alabama in blowouts..what room do you guys have to talk 

I actually agree with you, this is just counter to your narrative in every way. But welcome! Happy to have you here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, pesik said:

thats fine..but he clearly said in "history"..history didnt start in 95...you should stop backing manipulative points...

he said smu is one of the worst programs in history ..i note smu has 3 national titles... you guys seem to be the ones lying to yourselves if you believe the first statement 

Would it make you feel better if I said some of the worst programs in the last 30 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

This is a good graphic comparison.  The obvious conclusion is that the AAC was better than the MW more so in 2016 than in 2017.  San Diego State and Fresno State both improved significantly (although one might quibble that the bulldogs should be ahead of the Aztecs based on their head to head results).  Perhaps the "SEC Mountain" is a bit much to talk about right now but New Mexico beat Tulsa in Tulsa and that was the major American versus Mountain West matchup.  Fresno State versus Houston should also be a good matchup because Houston is still considered to have a good defensive line. 

This was a good year for the AAC.  UCF and USF proved to be a very entertaining  rivalry game that definitely earned great ratings.  Memphis played a great game against UCLA.  The Championship game was also very entertaining.

But if the Power 6 talk is about getting paid in 2020, I don't think there is any reason to see the Mountain West "in the dust" with respect to ESPN.  If anything, the MW proved that they can get ratings about what the Pac 12 gets (unless it's USC) in the Window 4 time slot on ESPN  http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/  As far as Pac 12 fans are concerned, we want fewer Wndow 4 and Friday games and the Mountain West should be able to capitalize on the uncertainty that Disney will have about the cost of the Pac 12 tv rights after 2025.

The American, however, is likely to price itself out of being on ESPN entirely.  ESPN's cost cutting is still going to primarily focus on properties that can compliment the SEC or ACC.  The Mountain West can put Window 4 games on that compliment ESPN's existing college sports networks and the MW isn't operating a direct competitor to ESPN like the Pac 12 is.   The American has a lost of teams in markets with either a Fox sports (UCF and USF in Florida for example) and NBC Sports (Temple is in Comcast's home market) so that makes sense and Fox may put Houston, Memphis, UCF and USF games on their broadcast after the ratings that the UCF and USF matchup got.

A friend of mine in the national media said that Aresco has been flying out to Silicon Valley, and meeting with Google, Amazon and Facebook, in order to create competition for ESPN. He is not sure how it is going, but expects the next AAC TV contract (as well as MW) to be "pennies on the dollar." His words, not mine. We'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2017 at 6:07 PM, MAD MACGYVER said:

1wVEoxv.pngQ6tapRQ.png

Good graphic. Shows what i have been saying. The Top of the conferences were similar this year. We both have shit at the bottom. The Middle of the AAC is more consistent than the MW. 

My solution: Hawaii needs to improve like we thought they were going to. UNM needs to silly be the 2015-2016 versions of Lobo football, and we need to kick SJSU out of the conference and replace them with UTSA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fanhood said:

A friend of mine in the national media said that Aresco has been flying out to Silicon Valley, and meeting with Google, Amazon and Facebook, in order to create competition for ESPN. He is not sure how it is going, but expects the next AAC TV contract (as well as MW) to be "pennies on the dollar." His words, not mine. We'll see.

I don't think ESPN has the same interest in the American that it has in the Mountain West primarily because the Pac 12 network competes with the SEC and ACC networks.  ESPN has the SEC, ACC and MAC through 2035 right now and the Mountain West has the programming that compliments ESPN's other properties.  As I mentioned above, the Pac 12 may do a little better overall in terms of ratings for west coast football but the proportion of ratings is much closer than the proportion of price ( equal to not quite twice the ratings in Window 4 but at 1/10 the cost).  Frankly, the Pac 12 stands to benefit from any MW increase because we want to charge way more for Window 4 in 2024-25.

I think there is a big difference between taking meetings and receiving offers for tv rights.  The Mountain West received renewal offers from CBS and ESPN and there are still no reports that the American has been told by ESPN that they want to renew.  The real question is whether Fox will use the money it receives for the sale of Twentieth Century Fox movie studio to Disney to bid up both the American and the Mountain West's tv rights.  I would expect Fox to do so because they would focus on sports and news after the speculated sale to Disney goes through.

Aresco is hitting the circuit that Thompson already met with those companies before Disney acquired the controlling interest in BAMtech in early August.  https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/walt-disney-company-acquire-majority-ownership-bamtech/  Personally, I think that acquisition cemented that Disney needs the MW to compete with the Pac 12 network.  The American is going to have to look elsewhere if ESPN won't offer the same deal that they have now.

 @sactowndog the current ESPN deal is for 22 games every year, including all six Boise State home games.  Boise State got ESPN to the table and they do benefit more than any other MW school, but there is not zero benefit for other MW schools - it's just uneven.  I doubt very much that the MW doesn't meet or exceed the revenue of its current deal with a new ESPN deal and the biggest improvement will getting the majority of MW content off CBS Sports.  It's not a great deal but the actual money distributed annually to most MW schools has been fairly competitive with the American and it was not at all clear when the deal was signed that would be the case.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fanhood said:

Good graphic. Shows what i have been saying. The Top of the conferences were similar this year. We both have shit at the bottom. The Middle of the AAC is more consistent than the MW. 

My solution: Hawaii needs to improve like we thought they were going to. UNM needs to silly be the 2015-2016 versions of Lobo football, and we need to kick SJSU out of the conference and replace them with UTSA. 

+++++ UTSA, get liberty. They have a bunch of rich ass republicans pumping money into their AD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bruininthebay said:

 

 @sactowndog the current ESPN deal is for 22 games every year, including all six Boise State home games.  Boise State got ESPN to the table and they do benefit more than any other MW school, but there is not zero benefit for other MW schools - it's just uneven.  I doubt very much that the MW doesn't meet or exceed the revenue of its current deal with a new ESPN deal and the biggest improvement will getting the majority of MW content off CBS Sports.  It's not a great deal but the actual money distributed annually to most MW schools has been fairly competitive with the American and it was not at all clear when the deal was signed that would be the case.

 

We shall see....  

prior to Boise joining the MWC their individual rights were estimated at 6M.  ESPN due to their sole source position got the Boise rights, plus the MWC 2nd tier rights for 6M.   In essence the MW has to throw them in because with BYU and Boise, ESPN had all the window 4 content they needed.   

I think you grossly underestimate the damage to the MWC’s negotiating position the individual deals for BYU and Boise do to the conferences negotiating position.    

Where is your data to back up your point on TV money distributed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fanhood said:

Good graphic. Shows what i have been saying. The Top of the conferences were similar this year. We both have shit at the bottom. The Middle of the AAC is more consistent than the MW. 

My solution: Hawaii needs to improve like we thought they were going to. UNM needs to silly be the 2015-2016 versions of Lobo football, and we need to kick SJSU out of the conference and replace them with UTSA. 

It's pretty arbitrary to draw a line down the middle and say that is where you determine whether teams are "good" or not. It does seem to approximate which teams have good offensive and defensive lines and that is where the MW varies a bit.  I attribute Fresno State's year over year improvement to have a lot to do with effective play at the line of scrimmage.  Hawai'i has historically had good linemen but doesn't seem to have the horses that they used to.  SDSU's line played better than Stanford and Arizona State.

imho many Mountain West schools that have have smaller lines use a running attack (Air Force, New Mexico) to compensate for lack of size but if you can't create a pocket then employing a passing offense isn't going to work (SJSU).  Keep in mind the only way that a MW member school can be involuntarily removed from the conference is due to misconduct (NCAA violations like a Baylor or a Louisville).  It's not possible to kick out a school because "they suck" they actually need to do bad stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bruininthebay said:

It's pretty arbitrary to draw a line down the middle and say that is where you determine whether teams are "good" or not. It does seem to approximate which teams have good offensive and defensive lines and that is where the MW varies a bit.  I attribute Fresno State's year over year improvement to have a lot to do with effective play at the line of scrimmage.  Hawai'i has historically had good linemen but doesn't seem to have the horses that they used to.  SDSU's line played better than Stanford and Arizona State.

imho many Mountain West schools that have have smaller lines use a running attack (Air Force, New Mexico) to compensate for lack of size but if you can't create a pocket then employing a passing offense isn't going to work (SJSU).  Keep in mind the only way that a MW member school can be involuntarily removed from the conference is due to misconduct (NCAA violations like a Baylor or a Louisville).  It's not possible to kick out a school because "they suck" they actually need to do bad stuff.

Bruin are you a lawyer with a strict legal opinion or just making a claim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

We shall see....  

prior to Boise joining the MWC their individual rights were estimated at 6M.  ESPN due to their sole source position got the Boise rights, plus the MWC 2nd tier rights for 6M.   In essence the MW has to throw them in because with BYU and Boise, ESPN had all the window 4 content they needed.   

I think you grossly underestimate the damage to the MWC’s negotiating position the individual deals for BYU and Boise do to the conferences negotiating position.    

Where is your data to back up your point on TV money distributed?

"Soul source" is a concept for commercial goods - unique properties like real estate and media rights work differently because there isn't a substitute.  It's mostly relevant to what you can do if there is a problem with performance.

I agree that BYU can undercut the MW.  However, Boise does not have an individual deal with ESPN - the MW is the exclusive rights holder so they have the deal but Boise is guaranteed to have it's home games broadcast on ESPN while others aren't.  Now that the bonus system has been streamlined in a more equitable way this past spring,  http://www.idahostatesman.com/sports/college/mountain-west/boise-state-university/bronco-beat-blog/article142935634.html which Boise mostly compromised in, the conference appears headed toward a more equal deal so long as the revenue meets the $1.8 million guarantee that Boise kept.

http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2016-17DIFBCFP_Summary-of-Revenue-Distribution-by-Conference_20170425.pdf

Per the NCAA, The American earned $20,301,176 and the MW earned $18,708,211 in 2016-17.   The difference is about $1.59 million between the two conferences which I would said was 'fairly competitive'; distributed among eleven members that is about $145,000 per school.  I didn't say either conference was adequately compensated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Bruin are you a lawyer with a strict legal opinion or just making a claim?

I'm not giving a "strict legal opinion" without being paid.  I don't need to find work on the MW fan forum nor am I willing to take you on as a client.

I think you might be referring to how the provision in the MW by laws should be interpreted.  Here's the link to those by-laws http://themw.com/documents/2017/10/3//appabylaws1718.pdf

I recall you suggesting that the Sportsmanship clause of the MW conference handbook could be used to accuse SJSU of a violation so that the conference could vote to expel SJSU.  First, here's a link to that rule http://themw.com/documents/2017/10/3//rule4sportsman1718.pdf

I believe your argument was that SJSU is in violation of the sportsmanship language regarding competition because it says in section 4.1 that "Each member institution shall create a healthy environment for competition".  However, if you read the entire rule you will see that there is a specific list of the five things that constitute a sportsmanship violation (section 4.2) which are: a) Striking, attempting to strike or otherwise physically abusing an official, coach, spectator or student athlete; b ) Intentionally inciting participants or spectators to inappropriate action; c) Using obscene gestures or unduly provocative language or action, d) Ejection from a contest, and e)Publicly criticizing or disparaging a game official, the Conference or its personnel, another institution, a student-athlete or personnel of another institution.

None of those criteria are relevant to the conference bylaws provisions about expulsion.  Once an institution joins the MW, they can leave voluntarily for any reason so long as notice is given to the conference or they can be made to involuntarily for misconduct.

SJSU's biggest problem is raising money from donors.  You need to have money in the first place to act in the way that Louisville did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, pesik said:

how was our bowl line up not good last year?

-champion vs local p5

-#2 vs sec 

-houston (#6 aac) vs MWC Champion

-memphis (#5) vs c-usa champion

-ucf (#7) vs sunbelt champion

-and navy vs the #2 c-usa (navy was without qb in the game)

we had 1 bad bowl 

that isnt a bad lineup...and what does record have to do with bowl line up????..that is stupid rebuttal in a argument about quality of bowl. that is a meaningless manipulative point. anyone with any smarts can see right through...the big 10 has only had 1 winning bowl record the last decade (by far the worst p5 bowl record)..yet they also have the best bowl line up..better bowls equals harder opponents..equals worse records....

what cycle are you making up? laso the last 2 mwc champs before this year *cough sdsu *cough..lost to south alabama in blowouts..what room do you guys have to talk 

What's wrong? AAC board no longer enough to satisfy your need for a bash fanhood and SDSU fix?

And just why the hell do you care what that guy says? Since your comments on the AAC board make plain that you often lurk here, you know that fanhood is the sole Aztec who ever tries to say the MWC is the equivalent of the AAC. So get a GD clue. The vast majority of Aztecs want us out of this place but we're stuck here for the near future.

Finally, the SDSU team which lost to South Alabama last year beat your ass 34-10 so what does that say about YOUR football program?

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post: #92
RE: TV Negotations 
https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/12/10...dia-circus

"“I don’t think that meant less interest in college football,” Karp said. “If anything, I’d say the interest was higher this season compared to some prior years. If you look at total minutes viewed for college football, it had to be some sort of record this year. There were some really exciting matchups and Fox Sports really stepped up their game this year—the company’s first with the Big Ten regular season lineup. You could often find three college football windows on the Fox broadcast window this season, which never happened before. With a healthy dose on FS1, they are making themselves a destination for college football now. But this is a zero-sum game, particularly as it relates to the Power Five conferences. Fox Sports’ gain was ABC/ESPN’s loss, as the new Big Ten contracts meant Bristol had fewer options with regard to top teams. While Saturday Night Football on ABC still got some bigger matchups, there were just fewer options for Saturday afternoon windows. As good as a team like UCF was this season, matchups from the AAC just aren’t moving the needle."

"CBS said its coverage of Army-Navy on Saturday drew the game’s highest rating (5.9) in 23 years and was up 5% over last year. The top markets were Philadelphia, Columbus, Jacksonville, Norfolk and Baltimore."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

What's wrong? AAC board no longer enough to satisfy your need for a bash fanhood and SDSU fix?

And just why the hell do you care what that guy says? Since your comments on the AAC board make plain that you often lurk here, you know that fanhood is the sole Aztec who ever tries to say the MWC is the equivalent of the AAC. So get a GD clue. The vast majority of Aztecs want us out of this place but we're stuck here for the near future.

Finally, the SDSU team which lost to South Alabama last year beat your ass 34-10 so what does that say about YOUR football program?

Ha. Lets be clear, I want a new conference as well. I just don't think going to the AAC moves the needle.  In fact, the dollars and cents prove that. As does the graph above. As does the fact that the AAC as the same access to the NY6 as the MW does. In fact, by no objective measure does the AAC improves SDSU's standing or access. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

"Soul source" is a concept for commercial goods - unique properties like real estate and media rights work differently because there isn't a substitute.  It's mostly relevant to what you can do if there is a problem with performance.

I agree that BYU can undercut the MW.  However, Boise does not have an individual deal with ESPN - the MW is the exclusive rights holder so they have the deal but Boise is guaranteed to have it's home games broadcast on ESPN while others aren't.  Now that the bonus system has been streamlined in a more equitable way this past spring,  http://www.idahostatesman.com/sports/college/mountain-west/boise-state-university/bronco-beat-blog/article142935634.html which Boise mostly compromised in, the conference appears headed toward a more equal deal so long as the revenue meets the $1.8 million guarantee that Boise kept.

http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/2016-17DIFBCFP_Summary-of-Revenue-Distribution-by-Conference_20170425.pdf

Per the NCAA, The American earned $20,301,176 and the MW earned $18,708,211 in 2016-17.   The difference is about $1.59 million between the two conferences which I would said was 'fairly competitive'; distributed among eleven members that is about $145,000 per school.  I didn't say either conference was adequately compensated.

Baloney.  Sole Source is a sourcing criteria that only one entity can possibly fill and it pertains to goods and services.   

Boise must agree to the contract.   The MWC cannot negotiate on their behalf and Boise gets paid regardless of the revenue associated with their contract.   

If it’s tied to the Bonus model for Boise only one provider can provide the Bonus money: ESPN.   Even if Boise now gets a flat fee, Boise can and will still force the deal to ESPN because Boise wants the exposure regardless of what ESPN pays.   

That problem is the whole problem with this arrangement: the league and Boise’s financial interests are at cross purposes.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

I'm not giving a "strict legal opinion" without being paid.  I don't need to find work on the MW fan forum nor am I willing to take you on as a client.

I think you might be referring to how the provision in the MW by laws should be interpreted.  Here's the link to those by-laws http://themw.com/documents/2017/10/3//appabylaws1718.pdf

I recall you suggesting that the Sportsmanship clause of the MW conference handbook could be used to accuse SJSU of a violation so that the conference could vote to expel SJSU.  First, here's a link to that rule http://themw.com/documents/2017/10/3//rule4sportsman1718.pdf

I believe your argument was that SJSU is in violation of the sportsmanship language regarding competition because it says in section 4.1 that "Each member institution shall create a healthy environment for competition".  However, if you read the entire rule you will see that there is a specific list of the five things that constitute a sportsmanship violation (section 4.2) which are: a) Striking, attempting to strike or otherwise physically abusing an official, coach, spectator or student athlete; b ) Intentionally inciting participants or spectators to inappropriate action; c) Using obscene gestures or unduly provocative language or action, d) Ejection from a contest, and e)Publicly criticizing or disparaging a game official, the Conference or its personnel, another institution, a student-athlete or personnel of another institution.

None of those criteria are relevant to the conference bylaws provisions about expulsion.  Once an institution joins the MW, they can leave voluntarily for any reason so long as notice is given to the conference or they can be made to involuntarily for misconduct.

SJSU's biggest problem is raising money from donors.  You need to have money in the first place to act in the way that Louisville did.

Couple items: 

1) you used the wrong link for TV Revenue.  Here is a correct link

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnation.com/platform/amp/college-football/2013/3/7/4076614/mountain-west-conference-tv-deal-espn

 

2) it’s a simple question if you have legal experience in contract law.   Try answering it....   and my point was about Boise not SJSU and you’re referring to the individual definition of sportsmanship not an institutional one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Couple items: 

1) you used the wrong link for TV Revenue.  Here is a correct link

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sbnation.com/platform/amp/college-football/2013/3/7/4076614/mountain-west-conference-tv-deal-espn

 

2) it’s a simple question if you have legal experience in contract law.   Try answering it....   and my point was about Boise not SJSU and you’re referring to the individual definition of sportsmanship not an institutional one. 

1) The difference between what he said and what that article said is peanuts, or in legal parlance, de minimus.

2) Just what are you asking him to interpret?

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...