Carson Field Football Board

Maybe, maybe not...

On the negative side, ESPN has made a serious investment in the ACC and now doesn't have (1) a desperate need for the BE inventory and (2) the $$$ to offer for the BE product. So ESPN will, presumably, not be a major bidder for the BE media contract. That means that NBCSports (assuming that they are the #1 interested party) will not have to offer a huge ammount because they will only be bidding against themselves. (Fox has similarly made their investment with the Big XII and the Pac 12). People need to remember HOW things work. Go play around on EBay and tell me how the price works for items with few bidders on them... Only morons pay more than they have to for something.

On the positive side, there is now a bench-mark for what the BE can argue for. The problem is, (a) can the BE make an argument that they are providing a similar valued product as the ACC to deserve a similar dollar value and (b) does NBCSports feel the pressure to offer those $$$ now that ESPN has it's major (B1G 10) and secondary (ACC) product lines filled. The BE will HAVE to make BOTH of these cases in order to get similar money for it's contract.

That being said, I think the ACC got royally screwed in their contract deal and I hope to God that the BE doesn't take the similar terms that ESPN demanded of the ACC. What the hell was the ACC thinking? On the "WV Statewide Sportsline," they had a media guy talking about the new B12 contract. What he said was enlightening... He said that (in this case a 10 year contract) the first half (5-years) of the contract "favored" the schools because they will be getting $20 million per year, which is a huge windfall. But the second half of the contract favors the networks because presumably...if for inflation if nothing else... the value of the product has gone up while the payouts remain the same. Imagine if the real value of the Big XII media rights doubles in the next seven years...lets say if Oklahoma has two monster years with back-to-back BCS Championships and a Heisman winning QB or RB, with thriller games against Texas and Okie State, so advertising goes through the roof and a whole lot of people are tuning in to watch to see if the Sooners will go undefeated, etc... but the payouts remain at the rate they are established RIGHT NOW.

Now draw those same terms out--not for ten years, but for fifteen years. The ACC has now sold itself...body and soul...to ESPN. For the next fifteen years, ESPN holds the ACC by the nuts...if the ACC has a VTech dynasty develop and people go crazy over the Hokies and revenue goes through the roof, the ACC schools still will only get around 17 million...for the next 15 years.

I would hope that the BE has the sense NOT to sign such a binding contract. I'm no lawyer, but I would hope that our deal (a) has a duration of not more than 12 years and (b) has the ability to be re-evaluated with incentives for member teams to succeed (much like professional players and coaches have built into their contracts). Imagine the value, for instance, if the Bearcats wins a BCS Championship, thereby adding value to the contract, so UC gets an additional $3 million, both for the previous year's success but also for the added boost to ratings for the year to come. So, just shooting out of thin air, lets assume the base rate is $12 million-per-school ("full"--All sports, including FB) but UC wins the BCS (or whatever they're calling it) Championship, so they get a potential pay-out of $15 million... Suddenly, you're talking ACC-like numbers, while NBCSports (or whomever) isn't having to shell-out ACC-like money.

Put whatever other incentives you want in the contract... An incentive for sellouts, an incentive for high-viewership games, an incentive to schedule intersectional rivalries. Whatever... But I've got to think there are ways to build a contract that may compensate for the lower base $$$ we're likely to get.

PS... I was mistaken about the terms of the ACC deal... It is only a fifteen-year contract, yet that is still 1/3 longer than the Big XII deal. I still hope that whatever the BE ends up signing doesn't bind us to a lower $$$ contract for an extended period of time like the ACC deal does.

I wonder if Boise State might find a home for it's non-FB sports in the Big Sky Conference if the WAC doesn't work. I don't know if the Big Sky would be open to it, but it would put Boise back into some old rivalries with Montana, Portland State, and likely Idaho. The BSC might not want Boise if they aren't all-sports members, but it'd be a natural fit...

Either way, I think Mandell's right. Boise State doesn't have much of an option except to make the jump to BE FB. If the Big East is "depleted" then what the heck is the MWC??? If the BE is "CUSA 2.0" then the MWC is just a weaker version of the old WAC (Hawaii, Colorado State, Air Force, Wyoming, and New Mexico were members of the old WAC... gone are the powerhouse programs like BYU and Utah). Even if the old "AQ" status was still around, there is NO way that this new MWC...with at least 3 teams perennially being ranked south of 100 of 121 FBS programs (New Mexico, UNLV, and soon-to-be San Jose State) and several more that are perennial losers. Nevada is a solid add, but uninspiring. Fresno State and Hawaii are a long way from where they once were, and it's unclear whether or not Nevada will be able to sustain its recent success. (To be sure, Houston faces the same question in the BE.)

Just sayin'... I think the MWC is much worse shape than the BE. Boise and San Diego State are more likely to come... I just don't see an alternative. And I think Air Force is another likely add once they see that BSU and SDSU are well and truly gone; the AFA can slide it's other sports into the Missouri Valley Conference, which would save them a ton of travel $$$ and is a prestigious mid-major non-FB conference.

Andy Katz and ESPN can kiss my behind. An article based on hypotheticals, what-ifs, just to stir the pot. Frankly, Louisville's behavior is bordering on the pathetic.

Louisville is pathetic. If they would stop begging and worked on improving the Big East it would make them valuable to other conferences.

If Katz is correct, then it becomes among the very highest priorities for President Williams and USF president Judy Genshaft to find a strategy that convinces UofL and UConn they are best served by staying in the Big East. UC and USF are the ones with the most on the line in terms of making this new arrangement work.

But they are not without weapons for this fight: the basketball schools, including Notre Dame, want to see this format work, and the potential television contract could be the grease that makes all this workable. Oddly, it may be in NBC's interest to overpay for the BE contract, just to demonstrate that the league has a value that those who want to dismiss it or leave don't currently see. I think NBC could do just that, if shrewd negotiations take place and the BE is willing to do almost everything it takes to make NBC happy in terms of creating programming options, so that the BE (plus Notre Dame) can become the flagship property of NBC's college sports properties.