Jump to content
Bruininthebay

American Athletic and ESPN do not reach agreement during exclusive negotiations for new TV deal

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Bruininthebay said:

You fail to understand my argument and Craig Thompson's statement in 2017 which was recorded and linked in a video I posted already for you. 

You are paraphrasing me incorrectly. My own logic does not rest on any assumption that the MW is having negotiations for their media rights at the present time or during the past year and a half.  Per CT in the video I linked already the MW told its media partners they didn't want to renew the current deal in 2017 and would see where things stand in 2019 before conducting discussions about a new deal.

If the MW doesn't want to negotiate, then what 'logic' causes you to believe that discussions are occurring?  There is nothing to indicate that the MW is having discussions at the present time about its media rights, nor did I ever state that there are.

On the other hand, in the OP it is clear that the American seeks to renew its current exclusive agreement with ESPN.  Now it is the middle of March and no agreement has been announced.  Each passing day it is increasingly clear that no deal was reached during the exclusive negotiation period between ESPN and the American because an announcement would have been made to reflect that by now.

Given that the American clearly seeks to renew, logically either ESPN doesn't want to pay the price the American seeks or simply doesn't need the content because ESPN already has media rights that are a better alternative.

The MW and the American appear to be pursuing vastly different approaches in obtaining revenue for their media rights.   The MW told its media partners it doesn't want the old deal they offer while the American is asking it's media partners to renew their old deal at a higher price.  It is illogical to think that speculation about one applies to speculation about the other.

Thats from 2017.  Even in 2017, he sounds like he is preparing the members for a let down.  In 2018 Thompson states that CBS-Sports wont decide if even wants to renew until April 2019 (so, I have to assume the offer to extend at the current price is no longer on the table).  He doesnt sound very optimistic about the money.  When the commissioner says---the outlet doesnt really matter....hard to see that as a good sign.     

 

https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/unlv/unlv-football/mountain-west-future-on-the-line-as-tv-deals-near-end/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Bruininthebay said:

You fail to understand my argument and Craig Thompson's statement in 2017 which was recorded and linked in a video I posted already for you. 

You are paraphrasing me incorrectly. My own logic does not rest on any assumption that the MW is having negotiations for their media rights at the present time or during the past year and a half.  Per CT in the video I linked already the MW told its media partners they didn't want to renew the current deal in 2017 and would see where things stand in 2019 before conducting discussions about a new deal.

If the MW doesn't want to negotiate, then what 'logic' causes you to believe that discussions are occurring?  There is nothing to indicate that the MW is having discussions at the present time about its media rights, nor did I ever state that there are.

On the other hand, in the OP it is clear that the American seeks to renew its current exclusive agreement with ESPN.  Now it is the middle of March and no agreement has been announced.  Each passing day it is increasingly clear that no deal was reached during the exclusive negotiation period between ESPN and the American because an announcement would have been made to reflect that by now.

Given that the American clearly seeks to renew, logically either ESPN doesn't want to pay the price the American seeks or simply doesn't need the content because ESPN already has media rights that are a better alternative.

The MW and the American appear to be pursuing vastly different approaches in obtaining revenue for their media rights.   The MW told its media partners it doesn't want the old deal they offer while the American is asking it's media partners to renew their old deal at a higher price.  It is illogical to think that speculation about one applies to speculation about the other.

Whether or not you actually believe the silly arguments you present, it's hard to argue with your commitment to your argument.  There is something to be said for persistence.  There's something more to be said for making sense.

Just because an announcement of an agreement has not yet been made does not necessarily mean that an agreement hasn't or won't be made.  Your insistence that a deal must not have been made or won't be made solely because no announcement has been made is cute but misguided.

It's also cute that you found a quote from Holmoe from a year ago.  Similarly to the MWC, there was no need for BYU to rush into a deal a year ago since ESPN (at their option) extended BYU's deal through the 2019 season.  If ESPN didn't want to broadcast BYU games anymore, it was really silly of them to exercise that option and drag out their prior contract.  Also, the value of BYU games going forward is higher than what it's been in prior years because of who they have on future home schedules: Utah, USC, Washington, Boise State, Michigan State, Missouri, Houston, Arizona State, Virginia, Baylor, Arkansas, Tennessee, Stanford, Minnesota, Arizona, NC State, Virginia Tech, etc.  Here's a quote from Holmoe from less than two months ago (emphasis added):

Quote

BYU’s contract with ESPN that allows the network to televise 4-5 of its home football games a year expires after the 2019 season, but Holmoe said it hasn’t been renewed as of this month. “We have been discussing that,” he said. “We are in an option year and we are in discussions right now.”

https://www.sltrib.com/sports/byu-cougars/2019/01/30/byu-ad-tom-holmoe-very/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CaffeinatedCoog said:

Thats from 2017.  Even in 2017, he sounds like he is preparing the members for a let down.  In 2018 Thompson states that CBS-Sports wont decide if even wants to renew until April 2019 (so, I have to assume the offer to extend at the current price is no longer on the table).  He doesnt sound very optimistic about the money.  When the commissioner says---the outlet doesnt really matter....hard to see that as a good sign.     

 

https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/unlv/unlv-football/mountain-west-future-on-the-line-as-tv-deals-near-end/

Thanks for linking the article.  Here is the quote attributed to the Hair relevant to media rights negotiations: 

CBS Sports will have an exclusive negotiating window with the Mountain West beginning in April on whether to renew. After a decision is made on whether to continue the relationship, the conference can enter potential renewal discussions with ESPN and AT&T SportsNet.

Nothing in that statement indicates the Mountain West will do anything.  CBS Sports gets to make the first offer, and just like the American and ESPN it is possible that no agreement will occur during the exclusive window.  In fact, the specific mention of ESPN and AT&T indicate that CBS is unlikely to present anything that would cause the Mountain West to not subsequently negotiate with ESPN, AT&T and others after that period ends.

Nothing in the 2018 quotation is inconsistent with the longer interview he gave in 2017. 

On the other hand, Aresco is constantly being interviewed and firing off press releases but has been completely silent during the negotiations.  I guess that if negotiations were going well he would be doing something other than telling the Heir Tom Bowen to not talk about negotiations.

Also, here is the video interview of CT again http://www.coloradoan.com/videos/sports/csu/football/2017/07/29/mw-weighs-tv-digital-options-commissioner-says/104107574/ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, CaffeinatedCoog said:

Your missing my point.  Saturday--Friday---Thursday---doesnt matter.  The content for the ACC Network isnt coming from content that was owned by ESPN in 2018.  Like all the other conference networks, the The ACC Network will be filled using third tier content.  In this case, the ACC Network will be filled using content obtained from Raycom.  Is it possible there may be a game or two here and there moved from the ESPN inventory to make the ACC Network more attractive?  Perhaps.  But if that happens, it will be a very limited move and will only open  a handful of ESPN broadcast windows over the course of the entire year.   Basically---the ACC Network is not going to have any significant effect on the existing distribution of Disney broadcast windows for college football.  

You are 100% correct and I am 100% wrong.  I incorrectly read a post, and coupled with Aresco's statement that he wanted more appearances on ESPN, it caused me to totally screw up.  The void is in the Regional Networks being dumped and that programming is now being moved to the ACC Network as you correctly stated. 

I think it was Bruininthebay that posted that the uncertainty in the sale of the Regional SPorts Network may be causing the delay in the negotiation and therefore announcement of the new AAC TV contract.  That could well be the case and a good observation by Bruininthebay.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following was posted by Shawn Owl on the Temple OwlsDaily 247 sports board on August 5, 2017 and I am reposting it here:

"At ACC Media Day, Aresco outlined the following:  The current ESPN contract runs through 2019-20.  The parameters for negotiating a new deal are governed  by the current contract.  The negotiating period is essentially open to all networks and distributions in early 2019.  But there is a window beginning in 2018 for ESPN and the ACC to extend their contract deal, if they wish.  Aresco is free to have informational meetings with anyone and everyone..  But he can't start formal negotiations with any networks or distributors until after the ESPN exclusivity period  expires.  To that end, Aresco has had meetings  with Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other streaming services.  He also talked about the possibility of syndicated TV deals.  Specifically, Aresco said it's quite possible that even if ESPN wants to keep AAC, they may not be interested in the full package.  Right now, they option some football and basketball games to CBS Sports Network. Regarding syndicated TV deals, Aresco said the soon to be launched ACC Network will probably leave a big hole in that universe.  Because the ACC currently offers a lot of syndicated content.  And that will go bye bye when they launch the network.  And we already have the Big 10 Network and the SEC Network in place.  So there's a diminishing amount of high level DIvision 1 content available to the Comcast Regional channels and similar networks in the east and south.  And the AAC could fill that void.  Dollar figures?  I have no clue.  But those are the parameters that Aresco described about the negotiation process."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AAC COMMISSIONER MIKE ARESCO UPBEAT ABOUT STRENGTH, FUTURE OF YOUNG LEAGUE, Orlando Sentinel, January 20, 2019

"I think it's important to play those Friday (ESPN) games.  It's really critical to the survival of our conference as a major TV entity.  We have a great product on Saturdays, too.  We have great Thursday games.  Fridays are important and they're more valuable than Thursdays because you don't have the NFL sitting there."

The AAC played 3 Thursday games in 2018, all telecast on ESPN.

The AAC played 6 Friday games in 2018, 5 were on ESPN and 1 was on ESPN2.

As an aside, AAC played 3 games on ABC in 2018.

All games above played under AAC TV contract.

The BiG agreed to play 6 Friday night TV games, 3 conference games and 3 non-conference teams.  Schools like Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State elected not to play Friday night games.  Michigan State stated it would play a Friday night game before Labor day.  So, in 2019, Michigan State will open the season August 30 against Tulsa.

ACC played 13 games on Monday, Thursday and Friday nights in 2018 according to one source but I did not double check ACC's schedule to verify.

Big 12 plays 4 games on Friday night plus Labor Day weekend game as per their TV contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tulsa Guy said:

 

Big 12 plays 4 games on Friday night plus Labor Day weekend game as per their TV contract.

Incorrect.  The only Friday games played have been 1 2013 FCS game on Labor Day weekend and Black Friday (1 or 2 games).  And they are not contractual obligations.

 

 

The Big 12 is required to make available four games per year for telecast on Thursday nights and one game on the Sunday of Labor Day weekend. Additional games may be requested (including Friday night games), but are not required. FOX and ESPN may opt to designate a Friday game as a replacement for a Thurssday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, RSF said:

Incorrect.  The only Friday games played have been 1 2013 FCS game on Labor Day weekend and Black Friday (1 or 2 games).  And they are not contractual obligations.

 

 

The Big 12 is required to make available four games per year for telecast on Thursday nights and one game on the Sunday of Labor Day weekend. Additional games may be requested (including Friday night games), but are not required. FOX and ESPN may opt to designate a Friday game as a replacement for a Thurssday.

You are correct.  They are Thursday night games and not Friday.  The B12 spreads these games around the conference.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 3:37 PM, Bruininthebay said:

On the other hand, in the OP it is clear that the American seeks to renew its current exclusive agreement with ESPN.  Now it is the middle of March and no agreement has been announced.  Each passing day it is increasingly clear that no deal was reached during the exclusive negotiation period between ESPN and the American because an announcement would have been made to reflect that by now.

Given that the American clearly seeks to renew, logically either ESPN doesn't want to pay the price the American seeks or simply doesn't need the content because ESPN already has media rights that are a better alternative.

Human nature is interesting.  On the AAC board, each passing day without an ESPN or ACC TV contract announcement means the AAC is getting more and more money and ESPN exposure.  On this board, each passing day means the ESPN has little interest in AAC, is reducing the payout, a conclusion LOGICALLY reached by Bruininthebay.  Bruininthebay's LOGICAL conclusion is, in fact, the title of his OP, "American Athletic and ESPN do not reach agreement during exclusive negotiations for new TV deal."  Logical?  Increasingly clear?  Really?

I have no clue what is going on.  Not one clue!  But, since the fun and entertainment of these boards is speculating, I am going to speculate why it is taking so long for aggressive AAC Aresco to finalize the ENTIRE AAC TV contract.

First, I am going to speculate that Aresco has nailed down the ESPN portion of the ACC TV contract. I speculate that the ESPN contract has not been signed.  I speculate that Aresco has worked out two options with AAC, one with ESPN taking all of ACC's games and the second option is for ESPN taking only the Tier 1 games.  This allows Aresco to go out and negotiate with other broadcast platforms for Tier 2 and 3 rights.  If these alternative platforms do not work out, then Aresco and AAC can come back to ESPN and take the first option.  Don't burn your bridges behind you.

In the first AAC TV contract, it appears ESPN had the right to sell AAC games to other broadcast platforms.  It appears by some statements by Aresco that AAC is not going to allow ESPN to do that in this contract.  I speculate that Aresco feels he can get better exposure and more money if the AAC retains the right to negotiate TV deals for its second and third tier games.  I speculate that ESPN doesn't want all the games AAC has to offer and shuttles them off to ESPNU.  Some Saturdays, there are as many as 3 AAC games on ESPNU.  However, I speculate that ESPN would prefer that AAC not take the second and third tier rights to another broadcast platform....that might create and/or bolster a competing broadcast outlet.  So I think it is way better for AAC to negotiate its 2nd and 3rd tier rights. 

I am also going to speculate on the Thursday and Friday night ESPN games.  It appears to me that B12, BiG, and ACC do not care for these games but ESPN wants the weeknight games to draw large television audiences.  I speculate that Aresco will attempt to get more AAC games telecast on Thursday and especially Friday night games.

Now whether Aresco accomplishes all this, who knows?  No one knows.  I think the fun and entertainment on this board is speculating to see if we get it right, sort of like going to Las Vegas and gambling.

Aresco, in his media day comments posted above, said that the Syndicated Network ACC is abandoning for its own network is an option for AAC along with Facebook, Twitter, etc.  All this takes time. It would not surprise me to see AAC TV negotiations continue for a long time, perhaps until the end of this year.  If one looks at all the P5 and G5 TV contracts, I don't believe any of them were negotiated and finalized in a 30 day exclusive negotiating period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tulsa Guy said:

Human nature is interesting.  On the AAC board, each passing day without an ESPN or ACC TV contract announcement means the AAC is getting more and more money and ESPN exposure.  On this board, each passing day means the ESPN has little interest in AAC, is reducing the payout, a conclusion LOGICALLY reached by Bruininthebay.  Bruininthebay's LOGICAL conclusion is, in fact, the title of his OP, "American Athletic and ESPN do not reach agreement during exclusive negotiations for new TV deal."  Logical?  Increasingly clear?  Really?

I have no clue what is going on.  Not one clue!  But, since the fun and entertainment of these boards is speculating, I am going to speculate why it is taking so long for aggressive AAC Aresco to finalize the ENTIRE AAC TV contract.

First, I am going to speculate that Aresco has nailed down the ESPN portion of the ACC TV contract. I speculate that the ESPN contract has not been signed.  I speculate that Aresco has worked out two options with AAC, one with ESPN taking all of ACC's games and the second option is for ESPN taking only the Tier 1 games.  This allows Aresco to go out and negotiate with other broadcast platforms for Tier 2 and 3 rights.  If these alternative platforms do not work out, then Aresco and AAC can come back to ESPN and take the first option.  Don't burn your bridges behind you.

In the first AAC TV contract, it appears ESPN had the right to sell AAC games to other broadcast platforms.  It appears by some statements by Aresco that AAC is not going to allow ESPN to do that in this contract.  I speculate that Aresco feels he can get better exposure and more money if the AAC retains the right to negotiate TV deals for its second and third tier games.  I speculate that ESPN doesn't want all the games AAC has to offer and shuttles them off to ESPNU.  Some Saturdays, there are as many as 3 AAC games on ESPNU.  However, I speculate that ESPN would prefer that AAC not take the second and third tier rights to another broadcast platform....that might create and/or bolster a competing broadcast outlet.  So I think it is way better for AAC to negotiate its 2nd and 3rd tier rights. 

I am also going to speculate on the Thursday and Friday night ESPN games.  It appears to me that B12, BiG, and ACC do not care for these games but ESPN wants the weeknight games to draw large television audiences.  I speculate that Aresco will attempt to get more AAC games telecast on Thursday and especially Friday night games.

Now whether Aresco accomplishes all this, who knows?  No one knows.  I think the fun and entertainment on this board is speculating to see if we get it right, sort of like going to Las Vegas and gambling.

Aresco, in his media day comments posted above, said that the Syndicated Network ACC is abandoning for its own network is an option for AAC along with Facebook, Twitter, etc.  All this takes time. It would not surprise me to see AAC TV negotiations continue for a long time, perhaps until the end of this year.  If one looks at all the P5 and G5 TV contracts, I don't believe any of them were negotiated and finalized in a 30 day exclusive negotiating period.

Not unreasonable speculation.  That said---back in 2013, the time between the AAC announced that the ESPN match of the NBC deal did in fact qualified as a "match"---to the date the ESPN contract was officially announced at the presser---was about a month.  Given the talk out of Memphis, its entirely possible that a deal was struck in principal during the ESPN exclusive negotiating period and, right now, minor details are being worked out.  Among the possible sticking points that needed to be hashed out are some you mentioned.  Does the new AAC allow sub-licensing?  Does the conference share in that income this time around?  Is there an investment by ESPN in AAC on campus production facilities for ESPN+ content?  That on-campus investment has been a common feature of deals involving ESPN+ or ESPN3 in the past.   If there is an ESPN on campus investment--how much is it and is there some smaller annual payment to marginally offset production costs?   How is AAC content presented on Plus---does it get a home page button that leads to all AAC content---almost like a digital network?   Does any income get shifted forward into the existing deal?   Perhaps bowl positioning has been made part of the TV talks by the AAC--which could slow things down.   The point is---they could easily have already reached a base deal in principal (price, length, exposure, and content) during the exclusive period, but still have lots of specifics to iron out.   

 

Or, as you mentioned---its possible they reached an agreement---but for only a portion of the AAC content and the conference is now working with other networks to sell off the remaining content package (or packages). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tulsa Guy said:

I am also going to speculate on the Thursday and Friday night ESPN games.  It appears to me that B12, BiG, and ACC do not care for these games but ESPN wants the weeknight games to draw large television audiences.  I speculate that Aresco will attempt to get more AAC games telecast on Thursday and especially Friday night games. 

I've said previously that the AAC's weekday TV numbers make it an attractive weekday game property. The unknown becomes the impact on attendance and fan connection. While weekdays may add dollars to the TV contract, what is the fan impact to the lower AAC teams from Thursday/Friday games.

1 hour ago, Tulsa Guy said:

All this takes time. It would not surprise me to see AAC TV negotiations continue for a long time, perhaps until the end of this year.  If one looks at all the P5 and G5 TV contracts, I don't believe any of them were negotiated and finalized in a 30 day exclusive negotiating period. 

In the past, TV contracts for most conferences were announced during the end of basketball or during league spring meetings a year before expiration. Typically the meetings are in the May/June period. I'm not sure how I would interpret it if the AAC contract negotiations went until the end of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I continue to think that neither the conferences or fans expected regulators to force a sale of the RSNs as a condition of Fox's sale of media properties to Disney at the exact time the AAC and MW would negotiate their new media rights.

The AAC is more affected than the MW simply due to the particulars of which RSNs are included in that sale.  AT&T Sportsnet Rocky Mountain clearly could use lots of tier 2/3 Mountain West content for their RSN.  Only San Diego State is affected by the sale of the former Prime Ticket RSNs, but given how interested CBS Sports has been in broadcasting Aztec games I expect both ESPN and Fox Sports would be interested in broadcasting the Aztecs too.

Temple should be able to get a large deal with NBC Sports Philadelphia, which is NBC Sports flagship RSN.  Uconn might be of interest to the YES Network, NBC Sports New England and the New England Sports Network.  Houston would be able to discuss with ATT Sportsnet Houston whether they could make a deal. 

However, all other AAC teams are in markets where you would want to talk to that particular RSN to maximize bidders for your rights.  UCF, USF, Cincinnati, East Carolina, Memphis, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane and Wichita State are in markets where a Fox Sports RSN controls the local pro sports team rights and the local RSN would likely be worth discussing a deal with regarding media rights in those places.  Until the AAC has someone to negotiate with, they can't really complete a diligent effort to establish a market for their rights.

It's probably more likely the MW reaches an agreement in the May/June time frame because it appears the RSN sale could be in turmoil though the end of the year.  Ideally the American would have signed a deal before the MW to set the market favorably for sellers but it is still possible the MW can achieve a non-trivial increase in their media rights based on the market dynamics versus the Pac 12 and then the American will benefit if the MW receives a significant increase -  or simply ignore that agreement if the MW does not substantially increase their rights.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CaffeinatedCoog said:

Not unreasonable speculation.  That said---back in 2013, the time between the AAC announced that the ESPN match of the NBC deal did in fact qualified as a "match"---to the date the ESPN contract was officially announced at the presser---was about a month.  Given the talk out of Memphis, its entirely possible that a deal was struck in principal during the ESPN exclusive negotiating period and, right now, minor details are being worked out.  Among the possible sticking points that needed to be hashed out are some you mentioned.  Does the new AAC allow sub-licensing?  Does the conference share in that income this time around?  Is there an investment by ESPN in AAC on campus production facilities for ESPN+ content?  That on-campus investment has been a common feature of deals involving ESPN+ or ESPN3 in the past.   If there is an ESPN on campus investment--how much is it and is there some smaller annual payment to marginally offset production costs?   How is AAC content presented on Plus---does it get a home page button that leads to all AAC content---almost like a digital network?   Does any income get shifted forward into the existing deal?   Perhaps bowl positioning has been made part of the TV talks by the AAC--which could slow things down.   The point is---they could easily have already reached a base deal in principal (price, length, exposure, and content) during the exclusive period, but still have lots of specifics to iron out.   

 

Or, as you mentioned---its possible they reached an agreement---but for only a portion of the AAC content and the conference is now working with other networks to sell off the remaining content package (or packages). 

Aresco stated he wanted a better bowl for the AAC Champ especially if the AAC Champ did not qualify for NY6 Bowl.  That is an extremely hard nut to crack.

Most AAC fans would like to get the Liberty Bowl but the B12 has renewed all its bowl agreements for the next 6 years based on a Ft. Worth newspaper article and there is absolutely no way the Liberty will give up SEC.

Now that SEC is involved with Vegas/Belk roatation and ACC is now out of the Music City Bowl, the Independence Bowl might become an annual AAC/ACC matchup.  The SEC has failed to provide a team in 3 out of the 4 last years. 

The new stadium in Birmingham might make that bowl more attractive to a P5 opponent.

The only way I can envision AAC to upgrade its bowl arrangements is to move the AAC bowls in Orlando and St. Pete/Tampa to post Xmas and pour more money into them in the hopes of being able to set up a P5 matchup.

I would get BYU involved with AAC bowl negotiations.  BYU could rotate within existing AAC bowls hopefully against P5 opponents and BYU could help AAC attract P5 opponents.  That is the rationale behind the Notre Dame/ACC bowl arrangement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bruininthebay said:

I continue to think that neither the conferences or fans expected regulators to force a sale of the RSNs as a condition of Fox's sale of media properties to Disney at the exact time the AAC and MW would negotiate their new media rights.

The AAC is more affected than the MW simply due to the particulars of which RSNs are included in that sale.  AT&T Sportsnet Rocky Mountain clearly could use lots of tier 2/3 Mountain West content for their RSN.  Only San Diego State is affected by the sale of the former Prime Ticket RSNs, but given how interested CBS Sports has been in broadcasting Aztec games I expect both ESPN and Fox Sports would be interested in broadcasting the Aztecs too.

Temple should be able to get a large deal with NBC Sports Philadelphia, which is NBC Sports flagship RSN.  Uconn might be of interest to the YES Network, NBC Sports New England and the New England Sports Network.  Houston would be able to discuss with ATT Sportsnet Houston whether they could make a deal. 

However, all other AAC teams are in markets where you would want to talk to that particular RSN to maximize bidders for your rights.  UCF, USF, Cincinnati, East Carolina, Memphis, SMU, Tulsa, Tulane and Wichita State are in markets where a Fox Sports RSN controls the local pro sports team rights and the local RSN would likely be worth discussing a deal with regarding media rights in those places.  Until the AAC has someone to negotiate with, they can't really complete a diligent effort to establish a market for their rights.

It's probably more likely the MW reaches an agreement in the May/June time frame because it appears the RSN sale could be in turmoil though the end of the year.  Ideally the American would have signed a deal before the MW to set the market favorably for sellers but it is still possible the MW can achieve a non-trivial increase in their media rights based on the market dynamics versus the Pac 12 and then the American will benefit if the MW receives a significant increase -  or simply ignore that agreement if the MW does not substantially increase their rights.

 

 

The RSN's will have zero affect on the AAC TV negotiations that really matter.  The AAC deals with RSN's are for 3rd tier content that ESPN and CBS-Sports have passed on.   Thats not where the money is at.   The MW utilizes RSN's more than the AAC---but I suspect the money they receive there is minimal compared to the thier ESPN/CBS-Sports deals.  As you said---its not really a big deal either way for the MW since they dont really deal with the Fox RSN's in question.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tulsa Guy said:

Aresco stated he wanted a better bowl for the AAC Champ especially if the AAC Champ did not qualify for NY6 Bowl.  That is an extremely hard nut to crack.

Most AAC fans would like to get the Liberty Bowl but the B12 has renewed all its bowl agreements for the next 6 years based on a Ft. Worth newspaper article and there is absolutely no way the Liberty will give up SEC.

Now that SEC is involved with Vegas/Belk roatation and ACC is now out of the Music City Bowl, the Independence Bowl might become an annual AAC/ACC matchup.  The SEC has failed to provide a team in 3 out of the 4 last years. 

The new stadium in Birmingham might make that bowl more attractive to a P5 opponent.

The only way I can envision AAC to upgrade its bowl arrangements is to move the AAC bowls in Orlando and St. Pete/Tampa to post Xmas and pour more money into them in the hopes of being able to set up a P5 matchup.

I would get BYU involved with AAC bowl negotiations.  BYU could rotate within existing AAC bowls hopefully against P5 opponents and BYU could help AAC attract P5 opponents.  That is the rationale behind the Notre Dame/ACC bowl arrangement.

 

There is no doubt that its easier for a G5 conference to prove they deserve a better TV deal than it is for a G5 to work themselves into a mid-to-high level non-CFP bowl opportunity.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×