Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About CaffeinatedCoog

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

2,047 profile views
  1. Doubt there is much to this. Already have 4 bowl games in the Dallas-Ft Worth Metroplex. Two of those games are are struggling at present---and we have a proposal to add a fifth bowl game to an already horribly over saturated Dallas-Ft Worth market? Doesnt make much sense to me. Austin, San Marcos, San Antonio, or Houston make more sense as Texas Bowl sites at this time. I dont see this talk amounting to much of anything.
  2. You realize you have it backwards. He appears because BYUtv keeps inviting him to appear. The real question is why? I think Aresco sees that there are ways to work with BYU to the advantage of both parties. I suspect a sizable contingent of BYU fans think there is room to work together as well (which is why he gets invited to appear).
  3. Exactly. Footballl. Basketball. Baseball. Lots of other olympic sports. The MW Digital productions look quite good too. And its not costing each school $400K a football game or 2 million a year in productions costs. Its costing each school a tiny fraction of that---or the AD's would be throwing a fit. The Sumbelt, MAC, and CUSA have been doing this for a while as well--as have tons of FCS schools with tiny budgets. Its just not that expensive anymore to do a decent production. It wont be Monday Night Football---but it will look fine to the typical fan.
  4. lol. On a side note, I hated the first season of that show---thought it was boring and kinda terrible. I quit watching, but a friend said the second season was really good---so I caught the second season on streaming and he was right. It really found its footing in the second season. It has been on my "must watch" list ever since.
  5. We wont have anything to do with that. Its up to ESPN if they want to sub-license games to CBS-SN---but I dont think they will. However, there are still negotiations going on regarding a small 6-12 game basketball only contract with CBS-OTA. That shouldnt take too long.
  6. It wont be just raw camera feeds. Im saying the schools will provide a fully produced feed to ESPN+ somewhere around the level of a ESPN3/STADIUM feed at a very low cost using the control rooms on campus--a few fully paid professional staffers---with help from lots of students, interns, and free lance local professional where needed. As for "will it be P6?" Who cares? The better games will be on ABC/ESPN/ESPN2/ESPNU. The ESPN+ stuff is largely going to be lower end games. So, much like ESPN3, STADIUM, and the MW Digital Network---the only people watching games on those platforms are fans of the teams playing who specifically looked for those particular games. Its not like millions of casual viewers are going to popping in on games that are ESPN+. Also, something few people discuss, there is a ESPN+ revenue sharing equation that helps offset production costs. I'll be honest--I dont know the exact details---but Im guessing it will probably be a small base fee of say a hundred bucks per event plus a percentage of ad sales with the percentage being higher if the event hits a certain number of views.....but thats just a guess. Its not going to be big money....but production costs are not going to be huge either.
  7. You dont need a control truck if you already have a control room and a fiber optic link. For instance, the University of Houston has a control room in TDECU stadium, a new one in the newly remodeled Fertitta Center---not to mention an on campus TV station. There are somewhat lesser control boards at the baseball stadium and softball venue. So at UH, the primary costs will be adding cameras and fiber optic links between the main control rooms and venues (which are all clustered on one part of campus). I suspect most schools that have been doing some ESPN3 productions already have at least some significant production capabilities and are not starting from scratch. BYUTv is hardly comparing apples to apples. An individual school is just producing an on-campus event and uploading the stream to the ESPN+ platform. BYUTv has to have a full network control room and staff designed to run an entire TV network--and the capability to distribute it to multiple cable system providers probably via sat-dish or fiber optic. Thats two completely different worlds. My guess---a school will have a tiny staff of one broadcast engineer along with a couple of assistants. The rest will be free lance local talent, part timers, Radio/TV interns, and Radio/TV students. It wont be Monday NIght Football---but it will be a reasonably solid broadcast. Watch some ESPN3. Thats whats your seeing there. I mean--some of those Texas St broadcasts are barely better than single camera productions school site webstreams. Its not hard to do a decent 3 camera production for a very low price if you have the equipment on site.
  8. And thats the cost for COX to come in an do a production bringing their own crew, bringing in their own board/cameras/cabling, and doing the entire set up. Its not nearly so expensive it the equipment is already on site and set up. Basically, the way I understand it is that the schools will handle the productions on their own and the conference will bring in a third party to do a large event (like a conference championship for soccer). So, the big cost will be the initial camera/control room equipment purchase and build out of the fiber optic infrastructure. Once thats done, you've got a small TV engineer staff (those guys at the local level dont make much) and the rest is handled largely by free lance/part time camera guys, interns, and students. My guess, base staff costs will run about 100-150K a year. The variable cost per event will be about $1,000. So, about $250K a year for producing around 100 events. Lets slap on a variance of 50%. Total costs per year will be somewhere between 250 to $375K. Interestingly, this fits right in with what ESPN pays the Sunbelt for its content (400K per team)....which is why the Sunbelt AD's, who are carrying the costs for all their ESPN+ productions (almost all their events are on ESPN+), arent squealing like a stuck pig over the production costs. ESPN is basically covering those costs with its $400K a year per school payout.
  9. If thats all your basing it on, I would disagree with the idea that streaming rights to Boise St football games don't fall under the "Separate Deal" provision. Section 3 of the term sheet specifically states that the MW will "ensure that the rights to Boise St football games are NOT part of, nor granted under, ANY current of future conference-wide television rights contract". It goes on to state that the "MWC will ensure that the Boise St home football games are sold as a separate package". It then states that the "Boise State and MWC must mutually agree to whom such Boise State home football games are licensed and to material terms of such license" . Thats pretty detailed and specific to Boise St football rights. The section 5d reference you're using is also quite specific. It SPECIFICALLY address's rights that were part of a previously existing Boise St "multi-year agreement for its website, streaming video, and webhosting with a third party". Unless that previously existing agreement contained football rights, I don't think that clause could be successfully used to circumvent section #3. When you consider that football rights are not mentioned at all in section 5d---but are specifically addressed multiple times in detail by bullet point #3---I think the interpretation that a streaming deal would void the extensive section #3 provisions is on pretty thin ice and would be loser if it went to court.
  10. HD yes. 4K no. The reality is hardly anything is actually broadcast in true 4K.
  11. False. Same equipment requirements and protocols. The MAC and Sunbelt contracts were extremely ESPN3 heavy broadcast deals with the schools producing many of the events. Both the MAC and Sunbelt were switched over to ESPN+ with zero new equipment or build outs needed. It was a seamless transition.
  12. I would agree with that. For some schools it might be 2 million in the first year only. Once the infrastructure and equipment is purchased---the annual production costs drops to less than a couple hundred thousand in the following years. Its basically a one time purchase---and its worth noting---most of the schools already have a significant production capabilities. So for them, even the first year costs wont come anywhere close to 2 million. Frankly, two million sounds more like a school starting from ground zero with no production facilities what so ever in any of their venues. There really are very few schools that match that description in this day and age---especially if they have already been working with ESPN3.
  13. Of course, that was written prior to the Big12 announcing it would be moving inventory to the ESPN+ platform as well. That said, ESPN+ undercuts the P6 narrative. Ive always said the P6 stuff is marketing. Its just another way of looking at being the 6th best conference. You can say you're "part of the top 6" or "part of the bottom 5". lol...while both are true---one sounds a lot better than the other.
  14. The AAC can only have 7. My guess is Hawaii, Boca, Cure, and probably Frisco are getting dumped. Look for the AAC to add Indy, Ft Worth, and First Responders. If any of those 3 fall through--NOLA is the probable replacement. That would be 3 in the east, 3 in the west, and Birmingham in the middle. So, if the AAC runs the table, their final line up will be Birmingham, Fenway, Military, St Pete, First Responders, Ft Worth, and Indy (with NOLA as the first alternate if the AAC fails to land one of those 7 G5 vs P5 bowls). The dicey one is the Armed Forces Bowl in Ft Worth. They like to rotate the academy teams (Army 2, Navy 2, and AF 2). That might be hard to lock up for all 6 years.