Jump to content

Archived

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

Guest #1Stunner

POLL: Should the next MWC TV Deal allow schools to own their own Tier 3 Rights?

Should the next MWC TV Deal allow schools to own their own Tier 3 Rights?  

50 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the next MWC TV Deal allow schools to own their own Tier 3 Rights?

    • YES. Schools should get to own and sell their own TV rights for any games not picked up by ESPN or CBS Sports (or whatever major network)
    • NO. Schools should not get to keep their tier 3 TV rights. The entire MWC Tier 3 Rights should be packaged together, and sold to a tier 3 network (Stadium, Root, etc)


Recommended Posts

Guest #1Stunner

The MWC TV deal is being negotiated by Hair Thompson and his brain trust, probably as we speak. 

In the past, the MWC has owned ALL TV rights, and has resorted to putting Tier 3 rights (rights not picked up by ESPN or CBS Sports) on things like Stadium, Facebook, Root Sports, ATT Sports, and sometimes not having football games and basketball games televised at all.

What ought Hair to do with the next TV deal?  Package ALL TV rights together?  Or should schools own and sell their own tier 3 rights to whatever network they choose (maybe local TV stations in their area?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner

And yes.... This setup might affect BYU, since Wyoming keeps begging BYU to rejoin the MWC.   We need to know what the TV deal looks like, since BYU owns its own Tier 3 rights (BYUtv).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, #1Stunner said:

The MWC TV deal is being negotiated by Hair Thompson and his brain trust, probably as we speak. 

In the past, the MWC has owned ALL TV rights, and has resorted to putting Tier 3 rights (rights not picked up by ESPN or CBS Sports) on things like Stadium, Facebook, Root Sports, ATT Sports, and sometimes not having football games and basketball games televised at all.

What ought Hair to do with the next TV deal?  Package ALL TV rights together?  Or should schools own and sell their own tier 3 rights to whatever network they choose (maybe local TV stations in their area?)

I'm not sure it matters in the future much, does it?  Technology is changing this dynamic and really driving down broadcast revenue for all.

I'd say yes, but ESPN and CBS aren't going to want it.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not all schools have to give up their Tier 3 rights, Hawaii keep ours but aren't allowed in on the conference tv revenue, because some member schools called it unfair that we would be able to keep our Tier 3(and not pool it together with ROOTS, etc.) and take a piece of the conference revenue. Would have bumped our tv revenue to around $3.5-4m annually. But yes, all schools should be allowed their own Tier 3 rights. 

If all MW schools get Tier 3 rights, it will likely mean we can  finally take a piece of that conference tv revenue we deserve and not lose potential revenue every time ESPN/CBS decides to pick up a game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
20 minutes ago, pokebball said:

I'm not sure it matters in the future much, does it?  Technology is changing this dynamic and really driving down broadcast revenue for all.

I'd say yes, but ESPN and CBS aren't going to want it.

It could be a big deal for a few schools in bigger markets, and overall strengthen the MWC.

Schools like SDSU and UNLV could get better exposure with a few of their games on local OTA TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

It could be a big deal for a few schools in bigger markets, and overall strengthen the MWC.

Schools like SDSU and UNLV could get better exposure with a few of their games on local OTA TV.

San Jose is the biggest market in the conference

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
16 minutes ago, pokebball said:

San Jose is the biggest market in the conference

They don't have any fans, though.

I'm talking more about the big market teams with fans---SDSU, UNLV, UNM (who else am I missing?).   Maybe in Wyoming could sell games across local OTA TV in the whole State?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, #1Stunner said:

They don't have any fans, though.

I'm talking more about the big market teams with fans---SDSU, UNLV, UNM (who else am I missing?).   Maybe in Wyoming could sell games across local OTA TV in the whole State?

Neither do SDSU and UNLV, really.  While both have higher attendance numbers than does SJSU the bigger story is the market in these locations that don't support the MWC programs in these communities.  The "potential".

I do stand corrected to an earlier post in that SD is the largest city in the MWC.  Both SD and SJ are in the top 10 in the country.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MWC should not do a next conference TV deal.  There is no point anymore. 

 

Each school should be granted the rights to their home games on any media platform of their choosing along with the right to market such home games with any media provider on any terms and conditions that such University may desire to do.   As part of this, however, the away team should be allowed to market and show any conference away games on any media platform that would limit itself to a local market on such terms and conditions as the away team may so desire.   It is a very different environment from 8 years ago and each conference team is going to have their own individual desires when it comes to broadcast of games, this would allow each team to achieve that objective while allowing each team to reach their target audience for any given game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, OrediggerPoke said:

The MWC should not do a next conference TV deal.  There is no point anymore. 

 

Each school should be granted the rights to their home games on any media platform of their choosing along with the right to market such home games with any media provider on any terms and conditions that such University may desire to do.   As part of this, however, the away team should be allowed to market and show any conference away games on any media platform that would limit itself to a local market on such terms and conditions as the away team may so desire.   It is a very different environment from 8 years ago and each conference team is going to have their own individual desires when it comes to broadcast of games, this would allow each team to achieve that objective while allowing each team to reach their target audience for any given game.

I think this will be the way in the future.  I'm not sure we're there yet.  We'll get another $ deal from ESPN/CBS

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
1 hour ago, pokebball said:

Neither do SDSU and UNLV, really.  While both have higher attendance numbers than does SJSU the bigger story is the market in these locations that don't support the MWC programs in these communities.  The "potential".

I do stand corrected to an earlier post in that SD is the largest city in the MWC.  Both SD and SJ are in the top 10 in the country.

It's a chicken or the egg sort of thing...

I think there is a lot of benefit from showing a few games (talking just Tier 3 rights) on local TV, as opposed to streaming on something obscure.   Neither approach is going to bring in a ton of money probably.   But you at least get better exposure on local TV.   You might actually build your fanbase too...   

I don't know if college sports are going to be as popular with the younger generation, unless they get exposed to it and enjoy it.   Boxing killed itself when it went Pay Per View and off of TV.    Sports is increasingly doing the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
1 hour ago, OrediggerPoke said:

The MWC should not do a next conference TV deal.  There is no point anymore. 

 

Each school should be granted the rights to their home games on any media platform of their choosing along with the right to market such home games with any media provider on any terms and conditions that such University may desire to do.   As part of this, however, the away team should be allowed to market and show any conference away games on any media platform that would limit itself to a local market on such terms and conditions as the away team may so desire.   It is a very different environment from 8 years ago and each conference team is going to have their own individual desires when it comes to broadcast of games, this would allow each team to achieve that objective while allowing each team to reach their target audience for any given game.

The above approach is what the WCC does for Tier 3 (non-ESPN) games.  Schools own and sell their own TV rights.   Gonzaga has made a lot of money this way.   And games are blacked out streaming locally, and then available over streaming platforms out of the area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OrediggerPoke said:

The MWC should not do a next conference TV deal.  There is no point anymore. 

 

Each school should be granted the rights to their home games on any media platform of their choosing along with the right to market such home games with any media provider on any terms and conditions that such University may desire to do.   As part of this, however, the away team should be allowed to market and show any conference away games on any media platform that would limit itself to a local market on such terms and conditions as the away team may so desire.   It is a very different environment from 8 years ago and each conference team is going to have their own individual desires when it comes to broadcast of games, this would allow each team to achieve that objective while allowing each team to reach their target audience for any given game.

I agree however this would mean that 2 or 3 schools would get nothing and 2 or 3 schools would receive much less than they do now. The other 5 would get what they get now or more and Hawaii would continue as they do now working with an outside provider.  It would be OK by me and by most other SDSU fans but would kill the conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fowl said:

Hair is incented to keep as much programming and revenue sources at the conference level because whether explicitly stated or not, his remuneration is based on the overall revenue the conference brings in.  

The same would presumably be true of SJSU and any other schools whose tier 3 rights aren't worth diddly squat.

pokebball may be correct that SDSU has no statewide following to speak of but studies show SDSU is numero uno in SD, Riverside and Imperial counties and while that might be theoretically just 3/58th of California, those counties hold ten times as many people as the entire state of Wyoming. In saying no intent is meant to suggest UW's tier 3 rights have no value since although the state has only half a million people, almost nobody there follows a university besides UW.

This would be my guesstimate of the relative value of MWC schools' tier 3 rights:

High P6 Value
AFA 
Boise
Fresno
SDSU
UNLV
UNM

Avg P6 Value
CSU
Hawaii
Nevada
Wyoming

Low P6 Value
USU

Avg Big Sky Value
SJSU

If I'm correct about that, in addition to SJSU, USU would be likely to oppose allowing schools to retain their tier 3 rights, Hawaii wouldn't are, and CSU, Nevada and Wyoming might be swing votes.

Also, when this idea was debated a couple years ago, I suggested it would be in the best interests of the conference to also create a distribution formula based on football success as an incentive for schools to want to improve their programs in that sport. As to that killing the conference, all that would mean was an acceleration of the inevitable.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, 1066 said:

I agree however this would mean that 2 or 3 schools would get nothing and 2 or 3 schools would receive much less than they do now. The other 5 would get what they get now or more and Hawaii would continue as they do now working with an outside provider.  It would be OK by me and by most other SDSU fans but would kill the conference.

No it wouldn't.  The conference is necessary for scheduling and a whole bunch of sports other than football or basketball.  Conference TV revenue outside of the Power 5 is bread crumbs in the scheme of things. I would tend to bet the flexibility such a structure would provide would increase the total amount of media money into all of the various schools. 

The teams that would get little in terms of media revenue are those that have trouble competing in the money sports for reasons largely unrelated to conference affiliation (i.e. SJSU).  If the TV revenue was the straw that broke the camel's back for SJSU as an FBS football team, then so be it.  Wyoming is a 'small market' but I have high confidence that it could do just fine if it was in charge of its own media rights. 

If anything, this structure would strengthen the conference in my opinion.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest #1Stunner
9 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

The same would presumably be true of SJSU and any other schools whose tier 3 rights aren't worth diddly squat.

pokebball may be correct that SDSU has no statewide following to speak of but studies show SDSU is numero uno in SD, Riverside and Imperial counties and while that might be theoretically just 3/58th of California, those counties hold ten times as many people as the entire state of Wyoming. In saying no intent is meant to suggest UW's tier 3 rights have no value since although the state has only half a million people, almost nobody there follows a university besides UW.

This would be my guesstimate of the relative value of MWC schools' tier 3 rights:

High P6 Value
AFA 
Boise
Fresno
SDSU
UNLV
UNM

Avg P6 Value
CSU
Hawaii
Nevada
Wyoming

Low P6 Value
USU

Avg Big Sky Value
SJSU

If I'm correct about that, in addition to SJSU, USU would be likely to oppose allowing schools to retain their tier 3 rights, Hawaii wouldn't are, and CSU, Nevada and Wyoming might be swing votes.

Also, when this idea was debated a couple years ago, I suggested it would be in the best interests of the conference to also create a distribution formula based on football success as an incentive for schools to want to improve their programs in that sport. As to that killing the conference, all that would mean was an acceleration of the inevitable.

Actually, USU could probably pretty easily get a deal to show their Tier 3 rights on KJZZ (local over the air station in Utah).

It would actually give them better exposure than Facebook, and probably pay the same (little to nothing) as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Facebook thing is a total joke.

Consistent with what you say about USU, for the first couple years the Lakers network was in existence, they took all SDSU content they could get their hands on so I have little doubt our basketball games could be televised there. Even if SDSU didn't earn a nickel more, the Lakers network has status whereas Facebook exudes something only CUSA or the Sun Belt among BCS conferences would touch.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, #1Stunner said:

The MWC TV deal is being negotiated by Hair Thompson and his brain trust, probably as we speak. 

In the past, the MWC has owned ALL TV rights, and has resorted to putting Tier 3 rights (rights not picked up by ESPN or CBS Sports) on things like Stadium, Facebook, Root Sports, ATT Sports, and sometimes not having football games and basketball games televised at all.

What ought Hair to do with the next TV deal?  Package ALL TV rights together?  Or should schools own and sell their own tier 3 rights to whatever network they choose (maybe local TV stations in their area?)

I think everybody but BSU should be able to sell their own rights, Boise has to share theirs. @BSUTOP25 and @halfmanhalfbronco agree with this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...