30 MVC games to be aired on ESPN networks

[valleychamp]

Nobody takes the UNI comments seriously because everybody that can read the Des Moines register knows that UNI is broke. If UNI is broke at its current football level, moving up a level and giving away more scholarships, plus a corresponding number of additional women's scholarships, seems to conflict with reality. And please - don't try to sell how games with Akron and Buffalo are going to cause an explosion in attendance because that isn't credible either.

There is more money/revenue available in FBS.

There better be because there are a lot more expenses too.

1) The guarantee games double in payouts. (450K from Iowa turns into close to 1MM for instance)

2) The new playoff is going to generate more dollars, and MAC level schools are expected to receive up to $1MM each.

3) TV and bowl revenue that was non existent in FCS. The MAC, for instance, received over $1MM in payouts from TV, and $2.7MM from the BCS.

[TheAsianSensation]

To clarify, I haven't seen official statements to verify it, but virtually every conference ever has clauses that if it changes membership, the TV contract can be ripped up if the two parties want to. ONly makes sense to - membership changes also change the value of the conference to the network.

There is some speculation that the CAA's rejection of ESPN caused ESPN to push for other conferences to raid CAA schools.

Fun conspiracy theory but Georgia St and ODU were out the door because of football anyways, and VCU was also an obvious decision. ESPN doesn't care about what happens with the CAA - evidenced by dropping them

2) You get the blackball treatment by ESPN. No discussion on college game day, no highlights/discussion on sportscenter or any of the other ESPN shows, no updates on the crawl unless you are ranked, no invites to ESPN owned exempt tourneys (Old Spice Classic, 76 Classic, etc) unless you have a previously signed deal of which there will be no renewals, etc. There are some legitimate concerns that the MVC can't give up that exposure.

This is the problem. Namely with the exempt tournaments. ESPN runs so many of them, and given the choice between a, say, WCC school and MVC school, they're going to go with the conference that benefits them more. Now, if you're Creighton and nationall relevant, you'll probably get in a good exempt tourney on ESPN anyways. Illinois St and Wichita St might. The mid-tier MVC teams? Screwed.


All the focus on ESPN aside, it is worth discussing if signing an NBC-heavy contract has more value or not to the MVC. That's really the one sports network that will need inventory, and their CAA inventory has been weakened in the past few months.

[TheAsianSensation]

With conference realignment, everyone is changing membership and are able to void their current TV contracts to set up new ones.

MVC, by not changing, is handcuffed into their current signed deal until it expires or they change membership.

This could easily be a musical chairs situation where every other conference finds a chair (CBS, NBC, ESPN, Fox) to get a good TV deal, and when the Valley hits the open market in 2016 there may be no room left and no money left to get.

How can this possibly be? Several posters have assured us that the MVC's stability is its greatest asset.

Just as an aside, stability, in a vacuum is good. But with everything changing around the MVC, the inability to respond is fatal. In a way, the MVC was unlucky that they turned out to be the one conference who was happy where they were at in the mid-2000s. Everyone else's insecurities and fears actually allowed them to change for the better.

You can't zig when everyone else zags. Everyone is zagging in realignment and television contracts. MVC is zigging.

[shocktheheart]

To clarify, I haven't seen official statements to verify it, but virtually every conference ever has clauses that if it changes membership, the TV contract can be ripped up if the two parties want to. ONly makes sense to - membership changes also change the value of the conference to the network.

There is some speculation that the CAA's rejection of ESPN caused ESPN to push for other conferences to raid CAA schools.

Fun conspiracy theory but Georgia St and ODU were out the door because of football anyways, and VCU was also an obvious decision. ESPN doesn't care about what happens with the CAA - evidenced by dropping them

2) You get the blackball treatment by ESPN. No discussion on college game day, no highlights/discussion on sportscenter or any of the other ESPN shows, no updates on the crawl unless you are ranked, no invites to ESPN owned exempt tourneys (Old Spice Classic, 76 Classic, etc) unless you have a previously signed deal of which there will be no renewals, etc. There are some legitimate concerns that the MVC can't give up that exposure.

I would put WSU in the list with Creighton just by the way they travel and buy tickets. Two years ago in Maui we were only behind Kentucky in fan support.

This is the problem. Namely with the exempt tournaments. ESPN runs so many of them, and given the choice between a, say, WCC school and MVC school, they're going to go with the conference that benefits them more. Now, if you're Creighton and nationall relevant, you'll probably get in a good exempt tourney on ESPN anyways. Illinois St and Wichita St might. The mid-tier MVC teams? Screwed.


All the focus on ESPN aside, it is worth discussing if signing an NBC-heavy contract has more value or not to the MVC. That's really the one sports network that will need inventory, and their CAA inventory has been weakened in the past few months.

[shocktheheart]

To clarify, I haven't seen official statements to verify it, but virtually every conference ever has clauses that if it changes membership, the TV contract can be ripped up if the two parties want to. ONly makes sense to - membership changes also change the value of the conference to the network.

There is some speculation that the CAA's rejection of ESPN caused ESPN to push for other conferences to raid CAA schools.

Fun conspiracy theory but Georgia St and ODU were out the door because of football anyways, and VCU was also an obvious decision. ESPN doesn't care about what happens with the CAA - evidenced by dropping them

2) You get the blackball treatment by ESPN. No discussion on college game day, no highlights/discussion on sportscenter or any of the other ESPN shows, no updates on the crawl unless you are ranked, no invites to ESPN owned exempt tourneys (Old Spice Classic, 76 Classic, etc) unless you have a previously signed deal of which there will be no renewals, etc. There are some legitimate concerns that the MVC can't give up that exposure.

I would put WSU in the list with Creighton just by the way they travel and buy tickets. Two years ago in Maui we were only behind Kentucky in fan support.

This is the problem. Namely with the exempt tournaments. ESPN runs so many of them, and given the choice between a, say, WCC school and MVC school, they're going to go with the conference that benefits them more. Now, if you're Creighton and nationall relevant, you'll probably get in a good exempt tourney on ESPN anyways. Illinois St and Wichita St might. The mid-tier MVC teams? Screwed.


All the focus on ESPN aside, it is worth discussing if signing an NBC-heavy contract has more value or not to the MVC. That's really the one sports network that will need inventory, and their CAA inventory has been weakened in the past few months.

I would put WSU in the list with Creighton just by the way they travel and buy tickets. Two years ago in Maui we were only behind Kentucky in fan support.

[TheAsianSensation]

I would put WSU in the list with Creighton just by the way they travel and buy tickets. Two years ago in Maui we were only behind Kentucky in fan support.

I generally agree. Just wanted to highlight Creighton as an example this year because they're going to start out in the Top 25 (or much higher) pretty much everywhere. Their spot is secure on ESPN, although both CU and WSU will be fine most years.

[DoubleJayAlum]

1) The guarantee games double in payouts. (450K from Iowa turns into close to 1MM for instance)

2) The new playoff is going to generate more dollars, and MAC level schools are expected to receive up to $1MM each.

3) TV and bowl revenue that was non existent in FCS. The MAC, for instance, received over $1MM in payouts from TV, and $2.7MM from the BCS.

1) This won't happen right off the bat for UNI. You aren't going to get double overnight just because you joined the MAC; you will have to show you will belong for a couple of years too. I also think you are overestimating the amount of the additional payout. According to the OWH, it costs $1M to get a buy game with Boise St. and they are an established, ranked program. It probably also should be added that you may not be able to find as may people interested in buying you at your new higher prices. Once again according to the OWH, Nebraska has opted to play schools like Idaho St rather than an FBS opponent simply because they are a lot cheaper. If they are forced to pay $1M, maybe Iowa and Iowa St take a pass on UNI (especially if they think you might beat them!)

2) I don't understand how this works. The 4 team playoff is not going to include any MAC schools, so how do they get additional money? Even if they expand the playoffs substantially, there aren't any MAC schools that are going to qualify. (Honest question - I don't understand...)

3) Bowl revenue is a farce. This was well chronicled in the book, Death to the BCS. Almost every single school that goes to a bowl LOSES money on the deal. The travel and lodging, combined with the ridiculous number of tickets that a school has to guarantee to sell makes this an economic fact. Even the biggest football powers (Ohio St, Nebraska, etc have lost money on recent bowl trips). It is essentially impossible for a school to sell its ticket allotment because fans can buy the tickets at less than face value on about every single Internet site, resulting in the school ending up eating a large portion of the ticket requirement at full price. It seems rather unlikely that a school that only gets 4,000 to basketball games and complains on your message board about $20 ticket prices, is going to buy up the required amount of tickets to travel to a low interest bowl like the Motor City Bowl (assuming you even make it anyway). (Honestly, if you haven't read Death to the BCS, should should invest in it.)

Thinking that FBS won't result in additional expenses is unsound. If it was better financially, every school would make the jump yesterday. There are rea$on$ why so many schools have not done so.

(And none of this even takes into account what the Iowa legislature may think when after instructing UNI to become more self-sufficent, UNI has unilaterally decided to INCREASE expenses).

The point of all of this is that most people just take take UNI's public statements all that serious. I'd be willing to wager that most MVC schools are more worried about IlSU jumping than they are about UNI. I have no idea if that is fair, but it is reality.

[TheAsianSensation]

2) I don't understand how this works. The 4 team playoff is not going to include any MAC schools, so how do they get additional money? Even if they expand the playoffs substantially, there aren't any MAC schools that are going to qualify. (Honest question - I don't understand...)

I think we're going to see something like the current BCS system, where each conference receives some kind of payout from the new system. It may be tiny, but it could be there.

There's also been rumblings about adding a game to the new system. A 5th bowl game in addition to the 4-team playoffs and 4 bowl games that will be part of the big-money system. The extra game would give access to the bottom 5 conferences and could be worth something to each of them. Of course, the whole situation is fluid so who knows.

But I don't think the money involved in this can be sufficient for any MAC school. There has to be revenue elsewhere.

[valleychamp]

1) This won't happen right off the bat for UNI. You aren't going to get double overnight just because you joined the MAC; you will have to show you will belong for a couple of years too. I also think you are overestimating the amount of the additional payout. According to the OWH, it costs $1M to get a buy game with Boise St. and they are an established, ranked program. It probably also should be added that you may not be able to find as may people interested in buying you at your new higher prices. Once again according to the OWH, Nebraska has opted to play schools like Idaho St rather than an FBS opponent simply because they are a lot cheaper. If they are forced to pay $1M, maybe Iowa and Iowa St take a pass on UNI (especially if they think you might beat them!)

2) I don't understand how this works. The 4 team playoff is not going to include any MAC schools, so how do they get additional money? Even if they expand the playoffs substantially, there aren't any MAC schools that are going to qualify. (Honest question - I don't understand...)

3) Bowl revenue is a farce. This was well chronicled in the book, Death to the BCS. Almost every single school that goes to a bowl LOSES money on the deal. The travel and lodging, combined with the ridiculous number of tickets that a school has to guarantee to sell makes this an economic fact. Even the biggest football powers (Ohio St, Nebraska, etc have lost money on recent bowl trips). It is essentially impossible for a school to sell its ticket allotment because fans can buy the tickets at less than face value on about every single Internet site, resulting in the school ending up eating a large portion of the ticket requirement at full price. It seems rather unlikely that a school that only gets 4,000 to basketball games and complains on your message board about $20 ticket prices, is going to buy up the required amount of tickets to travel to a low interest bowl like the Motor City Bowl (assuming you even make it anyway). (Honestly, if you haven't read Death to the BCS, should should invest in it.)

Thinking that FBS won't result in additional expenses is unsound. If it was better financially, every school would make the jump yesterday. There are rea$on$ why so many schools have not done so.

(And none of this even takes into account what the Iowa legislature may think when after instructing UNI to become more self-sufficent, UNI has unilaterally decided to INCREASE expenses).

The point of all of this is that most people just take take UNI's public statements all that serious. I'd be willing to wager that most MVC schools are more worried about IlSU jumping than they are about UNI. I have no idea if that is fair, but it is reality.

1) It will happen right off the bat. It doesn't matter if its Iowa or Iowa State, I could care less. UNI will be able to find schools to pay us to play them. Whether its over $1MM or not, its going to be substantially more than we get right now for playing those games. I am not overestimating the numbers, whatsoever.

2) Everybody is getting a piece of the pie with the new playoff. It does not matter if your conference has a team participating or not. Mid major conferences like the MAC will get way, way less than the major conferences, but its still going to be a good chunk of money.

3) I said bowl AND TV revenue. Its a complex issue with the bowls, and many of them are big money losers, but like I said, there are a lot of things changing within the structure of major CFB.


There is money there to be had, that's the point, as opposed to FCS football where there is literally no money to be had. As I said, if it weren't financially beneficial for UNI, they won't be doing it. I don't care if you, or any other random message board poster, takes UNI seriously. The fact of the matter is that it is quite serious, and it is something that UNI is looking into doing. UNI is going to do what's best for UNI, now and long into the future, and FBS football may very well be a part of that.

[uniftw]

1) The guarantee games double in payouts. (450K from Iowa turns into close to 1MM for instance)

2) The new playoff is going to generate more dollars, and MAC level schools are expected to receive up to $1MM each.

3) TV and bowl revenue that was non existent in FCS. The MAC, for instance, received over $1MM in payouts from TV, and $2.7MM from the BCS.

1) This won't happen right off the bat for UNI. You aren't going to get double overnight just because you joined the MAC; you will have to show you will belong for a couple of years too. I also think you are overestimating the amount of the additional payout. According to the OWH, it costs $1M to get a buy game with Boise St. and they are an established, ranked program. It probably also should be added that you may not be able to find as may people interested in buying you at your new higher prices. Once again according to the OWH, Nebraska has opted to play schools like Idaho St rather than an FBS opponent simply because they are a lot cheaper. If they are forced to pay $1M, maybe Iowa and Iowa St take a pass on UNI (especially if they think you might beat them!)

2) I don't understand how this works. The 4 team playoff is not going to include any MAC schools, so how do they get additional money? Even if they expand the playoffs substantially, there aren't any MAC schools that are going to qualify. (Honest question - I don't understand...)

3) Bowl revenue is a farce. This was well chronicled in the book, Death to the BCS. Almost every single school that goes to a bowl LOSES money on the deal. The travel and lodging, combined with the ridiculous number of tickets that a school has to guarantee to sell makes this an economic fact. Even the biggest football powers (Ohio St, Nebraska, etc have lost money on recent bowl trips). It is essentially impossible for a school to sell its ticket allotment because fans can buy the tickets at less than face value on about every single Internet site, resulting in the school ending up eating a large portion of the ticket requirement at full price. It seems rather unlikely that a school that only gets 4,000 to basketball games and complains on your message board about $20 ticket prices, is going to buy up the required amount of tickets to travel to a low interest bowl like the Motor City Bowl (assuming you even make it anyway). (Honestly, if you haven't read Death to the BCS, should should invest in it.)

Thinking that FBS won't result in additional expenses is unsound. If it was better financially, every school would make the jump yesterday. There are rea$on$ why so many schools have not done so.

(And none of this even takes into account what the Iowa legislature may think when after instructing UNI to become more self-sufficent, UNI has unilaterally decided to INCREASE expenses).

The point of all of this is that most people just take take UNI's public statements all that serious. I'd be willing to wager that most MVC schools are more worried about IlSU jumping than they are about UNI. I have no idea if that is fair, but it is reality.

Arkansas State got a million from Iowa a couple years ago just weeks after UNI got 400k. App State plays Michigan in 2014 again - they are slated to get something like 650k or so...UNLESS they are FBS by that time then it goes to OVER A MILLION DOLLARS. WAC/MAC/CUSA/etc.... all get double what FCS teams get. You don't have to be established to get the money....Hell Lousiana Monroe - who has NEVER made a bowl game even though they've been FBS since 1989 - recieved over 2 MILLION DOLLARS COMBINED from Arakansas and and Auburn. The money doesn't have to come from Iowa or Iowa State. If moving FBS means playing games against teams other than Iowa and Iowa State as pay days - so be it. The money spends the same.

The proposed playoff will have a focus on SOS - which means FCS is likely going to die in terms of pay game for the big schools. Be it right, or wrong, a win vs Eastern Michigan is seen more favorably than a W vs UNI, NDSU, Illinois State, etc... FCS money will dry and MAC schools will get more calls.

As for #2 I dont' have a strong grasp on it, but the overall total dollars generated by the playoff for teams across the board is higher than the BCS, apparently.


There is a VERY strong sense across the football world that a bigger split is coming and teams in the FCS may get left WAY behind with the FBS splitting to two divisions and the FCS falling even further back.