NCAA Conference Realignment & Expansion Message Boards
NCAA Map

Discussions by Conference:
  It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 8:35 am

Help support CollegeSportsInfo.com by shopping

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 929 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 62  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 11:31 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 9:50 pm
Posts: 268
tute79 wrote:
What about them putting their non-FB sports in the MWC ? That + Hawaii FB = one all-sports member.



Why would the MWC want to take all their crappy sports, and not have the only valuable thing Boise has?


Why should the MWC bail them out?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 11:42 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 2:27 am
Posts: 478
Location: Jacksonville, FL
dbackjon wrote:
tute79 wrote:
What about them putting their non-FB sports in the MWC ? That + Hawaii FB = one all-sports member.



Why would the MWC want to take all their crappy sports, and not have the only valuable thing Boise has?


Why should the MWC bail them out?


They shouldn't. The exit fee, travel costs and a home for their other sports is the leverage the MWC is using to lure them back. You never give up your leverage in business.

You can always invite them back after they pay their exit fee. :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 1:04 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2002 5:14 pm
Posts: 2694
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Quinn wrote:
lash wrote:
tute79 wrote:
I guess the question is "Why ?"

Why is a TV network willing to pay big bucks for BE football ?

Note that Football-only members Boise State and SDSU would seem to only merit a share of the BE's Football TV contract.

If you are a TV network exec., you must be cognizant that you can no longer play up the conference champion automatically qualifying for the BCS.
Let me qualify that - I suspect the BE champion will go to one of the 6 New Year's Day games, but hardly to one of the 2 NCS Semi-Final games.
So the BE Football conference will be "just another FBS conference in the future".

The level of competition is rather "mid-major".
Former CUSA: Cincy, Louisville, Memphis, UCF, USC, SMU, Houston
Former MWC: Boise St., SDSU
Fermer FBS independent: Rutgers, Temple, Navy
Former 1-AA: UConn.

How does this merit the big TV dollars ? This group pales in comparison to the upper half of ACC, SEC, B1G, Big XII, and PAC12.

Once Boise St. and SDSU are presented with the numbers, MWC and CUSA need to produce the numbers for
the new CUSA + MWC (based on Boise St. and SDSU remaining in the MWC).
Will they be that dramatically different ? Will Boise and SDSU pack their sttadiums to see Temple, Memphis, CIncy ??
Perhps, but there's no rivalry there.....

Tute79, Agreed!

I may be wrong, however, just do not see the Big East getting more than 5 million dollars per school on football shares per year based on the comments from Memphis AD on potential revenue per school the Big East may get in the new TV contract.

The Big East has always been the only BCS league to generate more revenue from basketball compared with football. It just the opposite situation in the other five BCS leagues where football generates far more revenue.

I do not see how adding SMU, Houston, Temple, UCF, and Memphis have created any more interest to TV viewers for Big East football. I tend to think the Big East as usual is using basketball to help assist with football revenue in the latest negotiations.

Less say the Big East football contract comes in at around 5 million per school based on an estimated 11 million per all sports school share. If you factor in travel for Boise State and SDSU football, there is going to be more cost associated with travel to the east coast compared to travel around the west.

If you bundle basketball and football into a modified MWC TV contract of 12 schools, the MWC may come close to what any school could get by joining another league as football only member. The MWC has to be undervalued the same as any other league in today’s modified TV figures.

I would not rule out ESPN paying the MWC for a new contract to sabotage the Big East plans especially if the Big East is not willing to go with ESPN and jumps to NBC.

If Boise State and SDSU make the same revenue in an sports conference compared to the issues of hybrid of having football in one league and all other sports in another, they would be foolish to go with the Big East.

Both of these schools need to talk with formal Big East schools on issues of having sports in multiple leagues and see how they like it and what kind of problems occurred with this type of conference alignments.

Again if I were Boise State and SDSU, would do my home work before jumping into a league that no longer has the original benefit and security of AQ BCS status.



It still comes down to money. I would love to see SDSU and BSU back in the MWC. But even without the BE AQ, there is still a lot of money to be made. The Big East essentially went out and took the top market schools (and some of the better performers) from CUSA. Just in time for their TV negotiations. They now get to show the networks that they have the Big East brand in NY/NJ, Philly, DC, Orlando, Tampa, Memphis, Houston, Dallas, Cincinnati, Louisville, Hartford. Throw in state penetration like UConn does (beyond Hartford). A national brand like Boise St. is a huge help and SDSU will give the conference a west coast presence they have never had.

The Big East TV contract is expected to be anywhere between 5 and 10 times the MWC, with or without the CUSA alliance. So even without the AQ, it still might be a ton of money that SDSU and BSU would have to leave behind.



FSA, with your Duke comparison. Yes, it would under a balanced comparison. If Duke was available for FB only, the Sun Belt, another FBs conference would likely take them for FB only for the brand alone. As for the Summit, if they need members...their numbers are a bit low, and if Denver made the move, wouldn't you think adding a known D1 school like Boise St. would be more valuable than a D2 upgrade? If you get to chose from a known D1 school with lots of national attention for it's FBS football program, or a D2 upgrade, I think you go for the brand you know. We have precedent: Notre Dame joined the Big East, a conference that's footprint extended only from Boston to Washington DC. It's not like South Bend was a close bus trip away, something the Big East was at the time (a bus league). But the Notre Dame brand, without football, was welcomed. Boise St. might not offer as much as Notre Dame...but Notre Dame was joining the best basketball league. The Summit is a lower level D1 basketball conference...lower than the WAC that Boise St. represented in the NCAA tourney just a couple years ago. My point is just that Boise St. will have options. They can try the Big Sky, willing to accept lower revenue for basketball if the BS changes their membership rules to permit them. They can try th Big West again with the same offer. And then there is the Summit...where even if they aren't welcomed as equal members, they can still offer a lower revenue split in return for a conference home.

Quinn, I am confused with your comments. Are you stating that Boise State will make the same revenue as football only member in the Big East as all sports members Houston, SMU, UCF, etc?

I realize that neither of us know for sure what the Big East will be able to negotiate until the process is complete and the new contract is available.

If your statement is anywhere close to 10 times more revenue, that would indicate Boise State will get 10 million dollars as a football only school in the Big East. I am guessing MWC schools currently share 2 million per school.

That would indicate each Big East football schools would share 10 million dollars just for football alone without basketball revenue included.

I could see all sports Big East schools getting 10 to 11 million each which included basketball and football participation per Memphis AD quotes as a possible estimate of what the new contract will be.

If that is correct, then basketball only schools would be only getting 1 to 2 million dollars if they continue to get the same amount for basketball as football schools do for basketball participation.

I am thinking football would only be half at best based on past Big East previous contact negotiations.

If the Memphis AD is close on 10 to 11 million dollar estimate per school, Boise State and SDSU will only get about half of that at best for football which would be 5 to 6 million dollars per school.

If yes, then Boise State and SDSU would only be able to make at best 2 to 3 times amount of what money could be obtained by remaining the MWC with current MWC revenue sharing.

This comparison would be before MWC is able to factor in a football championship game into its football contract if Boise State and SDSU remained in the MWC.

I am just not seeing how there will be that substantial of an increase in revenue unless the Big East adds both Boise State and SDSU as all sports members.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 2:39 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
Quinn wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Your theory about BSU has already been shot down by the BW. If they are such a name brand, BW would have taken them. You can't compare BSU to ND. I'm not saying that Summit won't I'm saying their chances increase w/ each lost member to the HL.


There were no negotiations between the Big West and Boise St. BSU asked to join, Big West said no and joined what appeared to be a stable enough WAC. Now if Boise St. negotiates with the Big West, the Big West could change their stance. If Boise St. asks for BW membership and is willing to accept only 90% of a full revenue share, who is to say the Big West would reject them. what about 80%? What about 70%. Point is, there have been no negotiations at that level because BSU had a backup plan, the WAC, and it wasn't a bad one at the time. Now that BSU has no leverage, they'd have to give more in order to get what they want.

Then they should hit up the BW again and not the Summit. We both know it's not a given that the BW will take their "name brand" they asked once. If they were such a name brand once should have been enough to get in. BW saying no the 1st time shows BSU isn't such a big deal outside of football that the BW needs to worship at their feet.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 3:01 pm 
Offline
All-Conference
All-Conference

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:21 pm
Posts: 882
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Then they should hit up the BW again and not the Summit. We both know it's not a given that the BW will take their "name brand" they asked once. If they were such a name brand once should have been enough to get in. BW saying no the 1st time shows BSU isn't such a big deal outside of football that the BW needs to worship at their feet.


I think the bigger issue for the Big West is that adding Boise State creates an expense and provides no additional revenue.

Due to Hawaii's unique ability to offer ESPN a time slot no one else can, there will be some increase in exposure with Hawaii. Not to mention the recruiting perks, and donor implications ("Donate this large amount to the program and come with us to the MBB game at Hawaii")

Boise? Not so much. The Big West is comprised of a ton of schools with massive budget issues. They went down the road of a western, multi-state, large conference with football schools that had higher aspirations. Look what happened. They all left the Big West high and dry.

_________________
1897-1898 | 1900-06 | 1926-27 | 1929-30 | 1939 | 1942


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 3:11 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 2803
JPSchmack wrote:
Fresno St. Alum wrote:
Then they should hit up the BW again and not the Summit. We both know it's not a given that the BW will take their "name brand" they asked once. If they were such a name brand once should have been enough to get in. BW saying no the 1st time shows BSU isn't such a big deal outside of football that the BW needs to worship at their feet.


I think the bigger issue for the Big West is that adding Boise State creates an expense and provides no additional revenue.

Due to Hawaii's unique ability to offer ESPN a time slot no one else can, there will be some increase in exposure with Hawaii. Not to mention the recruiting perks, and donor implications ("Donate this large amount to the program and come with us to the MBB game at Hawaii")

Boise? Not so much. The Big West is comprised of a ton of schools with massive budget issues. They went down the road of a western, multi-state, large conference with football schools that had higher aspirations. Look what happened. They all left the Big West high and dry.


You don't need to explain to me. I know BSU isn't worth it for other sports to anyone. Sure someone will take them, but they're not a name brand. They are an interesting fb program to watch. That may become less and less by being in a better conf, so they're not a "little guy, underdog" or by not winning as much because of tougher competition.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 6:14 pm 
Online
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
CollegeSportsInfo Admin
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2002 8:05 am
Posts: 3811
lash wrote:
Quinn wrote:
lash wrote:
tute79 wrote:
I guess the question is "Why ?"

Why is a TV network willing to pay big bucks for BE football ?

Note that Football-only members Boise State and SDSU would seem to only merit a share of the BE's Football TV contract.

If you are a TV network exec., you must be cognizant that you can no longer play up the conference champion automatically qualifying for the BCS.
Let me qualify that - I suspect the BE champion will go to one of the 6 New Year's Day games, but hardly to one of the 2 NCS Semi-Final games.
So the BE Football conference will be "just another FBS conference in the future".

The level of competition is rather "mid-major".
Former CUSA: Cincy, Louisville, Memphis, UCF, USC, SMU, Houston
Former MWC: Boise St., SDSU
Fermer FBS independent: Rutgers, Temple, Navy
Former 1-AA: UConn.

How does this merit the big TV dollars ? This group pales in comparison to the upper half of ACC, SEC, B1G, Big XII, and PAC12.

Once Boise St. and SDSU are presented with the numbers, MWC and CUSA need to produce the numbers for
the new CUSA + MWC (based on Boise St. and SDSU remaining in the MWC).
Will they be that dramatically different ? Will Boise and SDSU pack their sttadiums to see Temple, Memphis, CIncy ??
Perhps, but there's no rivalry there.....

Tute79, Agreed!

I may be wrong, however, just do not see the Big East getting more than 5 million dollars per school on football shares per year based on the comments from Memphis AD on potential revenue per school the Big East may get in the new TV contract.

The Big East has always been the only BCS league to generate more revenue from basketball compared with football. It just the opposite situation in the other five BCS leagues where football generates far more revenue.

I do not see how adding SMU, Houston, Temple, UCF, and Memphis have created any more interest to TV viewers for Big East football. I tend to think the Big East as usual is using basketball to help assist with football revenue in the latest negotiations.

Less say the Big East football contract comes in at around 5 million per school based on an estimated 11 million per all sports school share. If you factor in travel for Boise State and SDSU football, there is going to be more cost associated with travel to the east coast compared to travel around the west.

If you bundle basketball and football into a modified MWC TV contract of 12 schools, the MWC may come close to what any school could get by joining another league as football only member. The MWC has to be undervalued the same as any other league in today’s modified TV figures.

I would not rule out ESPN paying the MWC for a new contract to sabotage the Big East plans especially if the Big East is not willing to go with ESPN and jumps to NBC.

If Boise State and SDSU make the same revenue in an sports conference compared to the issues of hybrid of having football in one league and all other sports in another, they would be foolish to go with the Big East.

Both of these schools need to talk with formal Big East schools on issues of having sports in multiple leagues and see how they like it and what kind of problems occurred with this type of conference alignments.

Again if I were Boise State and SDSU, would do my home work before jumping into a league that no longer has the original benefit and security of AQ BCS status.



It still comes down to money. I would love to see SDSU and BSU back in the MWC. But even without the BE AQ, there is still a lot of money to be made. The Big East essentially went out and took the top market schools (and some of the better performers) from CUSA. Just in time for their TV negotiations. They now get to show the networks that they have the Big East brand in NY/NJ, Philly, DC, Orlando, Tampa, Memphis, Houston, Dallas, Cincinnati, Louisville, Hartford. Throw in state penetration like UConn does (beyond Hartford). A national brand like Boise St. is a huge help and SDSU will give the conference a west coast presence they have never had.

The Big East TV contract is expected to be anywhere between 5 and 10 times the MWC, with or without the CUSA alliance. So even without the AQ, it still might be a ton of money that SDSU and BSU would have to leave behind.



FSA, with your Duke comparison. Yes, it would under a balanced comparison. If Duke was available for FB only, the Sun Belt, another FBs conference would likely take them for FB only for the brand alone. As for the Summit, if they need members...their numbers are a bit low, and if Denver made the move, wouldn't you think adding a known D1 school like Boise St. would be more valuable than a D2 upgrade? If you get to chose from a known D1 school with lots of national attention for it's FBS football program, or a D2 upgrade, I think you go for the brand you know. We have precedent: Notre Dame joined the Big East, a conference that's footprint extended only from Boston to Washington DC. It's not like South Bend was a close bus trip away, something the Big East was at the time (a bus league). But the Notre Dame brand, without football, was welcomed. Boise St. might not offer as much as Notre Dame...but Notre Dame was joining the best basketball league. The Summit is a lower level D1 basketball conference...lower than the WAC that Boise St. represented in the NCAA tourney just a couple years ago. My point is just that Boise St. will have options. They can try the Big Sky, willing to accept lower revenue for basketball if the BS changes their membership rules to permit them. They can try th Big West again with the same offer. And then there is the Summit...where even if they aren't welcomed as equal members, they can still offer a lower revenue split in return for a conference home.

Quinn, I am confused with your comments. Are you stating that Boise State will make the same revenue as football only member in the Big East as all sports members Houston, SMU, UCF, etc?

I realize that neither of us know for sure what the Big East will be able to negotiate until the process is complete and the new contract is available.

If your statement is anywhere close to 10 times more revenue, that would indicate Boise State will get 10 million dollars as a football only school in the Big East. I am guessing MWC schools currently share 2 million per school.

That would indicate each Big East football schools would share 10 million dollars just for football alone without basketball revenue included.

I could see all sports Big East schools getting 10 to 11 million each which included basketball and football participation per Memphis AD quotes as a possible estimate of what the new contract will be.

If that is correct, then basketball only schools would be only getting 1 to 2 million dollars if they continue to get the same amount for basketball as football schools do for basketball participation.

I am thinking football would only be half at best based on past Big East previous contact negotiations.

If the Memphis AD is close on 10 to 11 million dollar estimate per school, Boise State and SDSU will only get about half of that at best for football which would be 5 to 6 million dollars per school.

If yes, then Boise State and SDSU would only be able to make at best 2 to 3 times amount of what money could be obtained by remaining the MWC with current MWC revenue sharing.

This comparison would be before MWC is able to factor in a football championship game into its football contract if Boise State and SDSU remained in the MWC.

I am just not seeing how there will be that substantial of an increase in revenue unless the Big East adds both Boise State and SDSU as all sports members.


We're talking hypotheticals whereby if the WAC dies, Boise St. could knock on some doors like the Big West, Big Sky and Summit and offer to take less than a full basketball share in return for membership. Just talking a basketball hypothetical for BSU.

_________________
Image

Image@ncaasports Image csi.com/facebook

Image
Like the new CSI Userbar? Feel free to use it here and any other forums.
You can save and host it yourself or link from here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2012 6:43 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7439
Brett McMurphy blog update of SJSU/USU to MWC story with possible announcement this friday at http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... y/18939680


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:10 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 11:40 pm
Posts: 1463
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story ... ng-sources

"ESPN college sports writer Andy Katz is reporting that multiple sources have confirmed that as suspected, both Utah State and San Jose State will join the MWC beginning in 2013. An official announcement is expected Friday. Katz also states that sources said the conference plans to stay at 10 members in football, and nine in basketball for 2013-14, but later added, "There's also the possibility of UTEP switching to the Mountain West.". Not quite sure what to make of that, but apparently in some way UTEP is still in play.." -http://www.minerrush.com/

Also saw this in the Katz's story... "Sources said the Mountain West has no interest in adding NMSU or Idaho. "

_________________
Fan of the Big 12 Conference, the Mountain West Conference and...
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:20 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 2:27 am
Posts: 478
Location: Jacksonville, FL
tkalmus wrote:
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7883895/utah-state-san-jose-state-joining-mountain-west-conference-2013-2014-according-sources

"ESPN college sports writer Andy Katz is reporting that multiple sources have confirmed that as suspected, both Utah State and San Jose State will join the MWC beginning in 2013. An official announcement is expected Friday. Katz also states that sources said the conference plans to stay at 10 members in football, and nine in basketball for 2013-14, but later added, "There's also the possibility of UTEP switching to the Mountain West.". Not quite sure what to make of that, but apparently in some way UTEP is still in play.." -http://www.minerrush.com/

Also saw this in the Katz's story... "Sources said the Mountain West has no interest in adding NMSU or Idaho. "


UTEP (and UTSA) is still in play because the merger is still on. I know I'm not the only one to notice that CUSA and the MWC are both officially announcing their expansions on Friday. Coincidence? ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:38 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 10:57 pm
Posts: 1291
Location: Portland! (and about time!)
The Katz story says there's no merger per se... but likely a scheduling agreement.

I could guess there's more than that, your guess is as good as mine.

Note that the Katz story also says Boise may be enticing another school to the Big East... and I suspect this school helps them into the Big West for other sports. Fresno and UNLV are at tops of tongues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 2:04 am 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 2:27 am
Posts: 478
Location: Jacksonville, FL
pounder wrote:
The Katz story says there's no merger per se... but likely a scheduling agreement.

I could guess there's more than that, your guess is as good as mine.

Note that the Katz story also says Boise may be enticing another school to the Big East... and I suspect this school helps them into the Big West for other sports. Fresno and UNLV are at tops of tongues.


Yeah, that's what I would say until after I collected my exit fees. ;)

Has anybody read any where about all those CUSA/MWC committees, no longer working on things? I think there were 5 or 6 committees. Considering the lack of teams in the west, it's hard for me to believe that the MWC wouldn't have worked harder for UTSA if their wasn't something going on. They gave them to CUSA.

Like I said before, both announce their new expansion teams on Friday. MWC to 10, CUSA to 14 not just 12. Why add 6 in the east because you can't in the west? You add a team (Charlotte) that can't upgrade to your league until 2015. I think exit fees will be paid by then. I'm sorry just to many coincidences for me.

Hey, what's that? In the grassy knoll?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2012 6:13 pm 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7439
Brett McMurphy blog article(previously posted in another thread)reporting that two of the 7 expansion related pressers scheduled for tomorrow involve USU to the MWC at 11:30amET and SJSU to the MWC at 3pm ET. Link at http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootbal ... y/18954539


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 11:00 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star

Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:37 pm
Posts: 7439
Official expansion release from MWC site regarding USU and SJSU at http://www.themwc.com/genrel/050412aag.html


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2012 10:50 pm 
Offline
Senior
Senior

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 7:47 pm
Posts: 252
It just seems that the two most likely fits for Boise's non-football sports will either be the Big Sky or Great West, which both aren't great.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 929 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 62  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
 

 




Looking for College Sports apparel? Support our partner:








Support Our Partners: Search Engine Marketing - Search Engine Optimization - Search Engine Training - Online Marketing for Restuarants

Subway Map Shirts - Food and Travel

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group