Excitement for the American Athletic Conference

[UConnDan97]

When you're referring to the Big East I'm not sure if you're referring to the current AAC contract or the hypothetical Big East that would've existed with Boise + SDSU.

Boise's payout in the new MWC is only marginally better than the AAC payout ($1.9M-$2.5M - probably will average $2.3M vs AAC's $2M). You're technically right that there was a Boise State premium but the premium is small and would have barely covered the additional logistical costs that Boise would incur playing out East, which is why they decided to stay local for essentially the same payout.

http://blogs.idahostatesman.com/boise-state-football-guaranteed-three-games-national-tv-bonus-games/

Whether the premium would have justified the travel is secondary to the fact that there was a premium, which was my point.

The point you made about the premium not justifying the travel; I would argue that the premium did indeed justify the travel, which is why Kustra, et al., agreed to join. The fact that the Mountain West re-negotiated their existing contract and gave Boise a better deal with better television options essentially "restored" their premium in their own back yard, hence there was no need for the extra travel...

 

[Hoophound]

I don't understand the obsession with money in amateur athletics. Are you suggesting that over the last 5 years BC has been more successful than Boise because they have made more money?

The difference is Boise struck coaching gold. They also have no academic standards. Going forward, BC can afford to hire a big name coach. Boise can't, so they better keep getting lucky.

When our facilities become dated, we won't have money to rebuild, schools like BC will.

The big conference programs are making 10-20 times what we are. Look at that in everyday terms. If I make 100k per year and you make $2,000,000 don't you think our circumstances will look quite different? Furthermore, think about how different your life will be than mine 20 years from now. This is a problem that will compound over time.

 

[woomba]

The difference is Boise struck coaching gold. They also have no academic standards. Going forward, BC can afford to hire a big name coach. Boise can't, so they better keep getting lucky.

When our facilities become dated, we won't have money to rebuild, schools like BC will.

The big conference programs are making 10-20 times what we are. Look at that in everyday terms. If I make 100k per year and you make $2,000,000 don't you think our circumstances will look quite different? Furthermore, think about how different your life will be than mine 20 years from now. This is a problem that will compound over time.

Craziest thing about Boise academics :

4-year graduation rate : 8%

I didn't even realize those numbers were possible.

 

[whaler11]

What I'm saying to you is that THERE WAS a premium value that Boise brought to the Big East. I'm not sure why you are avoiding that fact. The Mountain West completely restructured their deal in order to bring back Boise, so that they would avoid conference death. The other teams of the league essentially agreed to take less money each in order to create the level of money that Boise was due to make in the Big East. So yes, there was a premium that Boise was going to bring to both the BE and the MW, and both groups recognized it. You are the last person to recognize that fact. Or the last one to admit it. I'm not sure which...

You are looking at a few stray hundred k which amount to rounding errors and declaring that a premium. I am looking at a contract all in that is much less than what Seton Hall basketball gets and drawing the obvious conclusion that Boise wasn't offered nor paid a premium.

MWC has become such a bush league operation that they are allowing Boise to wear blue at home. You want to pay them and beg them to stay? Why not just give them a 12th player or allow them to hold on 3rd down. What a joke.

 

[whaler11]

Whether the premium would have justified the travel is secondary to the fact that there was a premium, which was my point.

The point you made about the premium not justifying the travel; I would argue that the premium did indeed justify the travel, which is why Kustra, et al., agreed to join. The fact that the Mountain West re-negotiated their existing contract and gave Boise a better deal with better television options essentially "restored" their premium in their own back yard, hence there was no need for the extra travel...

That was the premium they assumed was going to exist. It never materialized. The Big East had turned down 8 figure payouts - they joined under the assumption it wouldn't turn out to be MWC money.

In the end I think having to stash all their teams elsewhere came into play as much as travel for football. It's really only 1-2 bad trips a year, and it's not like they had any problem coming to CT since they already agreed to OOC.

 

[UConnDan97]

The difference is Boise struck coaching gold. They also have no academic standards. Going forward, BC can afford to hire a big name coach. Boise can't, so they better keep getting lucky.

When our facilities become dated, we won't have money to rebuild, schools like BC will.

The big conference programs are making 10-20 times what we are. Look at that in everyday terms. If I make 100k per year and you make $2,000,000 don't you think our circumstances will look quite different? Furthermore, think about how different your life will be than mine 20 years from now. This is a problem that will compound over time.

If Boise struck coaching gold, then they have done it three times already (Dirk Koetter, Dan Hawkins, Chris Peterson - all greater than 0.72 winning percentages). You could even argue that they struck gold four times, since Houston Nutt was there the year before Koetter, and he went on to be quite successful at Arkansas.

As for the money / facilities thing; it constantly amazes me how many people forget that UConn is the flagship university for the state of Connecticut. If you believe that a few million per year shortfall will be allowed to be the death of us, you are kidding yourselves. We just got another 2 billion.....2 billion!!!....dollars approved for UConn, which was a decade after the UConn2000 program brought us 2.3 billion. And we are sitting here talking about the death of the university in 20 years and comparing it to BC.....c'mon now.

(let's not forget that UConn will make significantly more than 2 million per year for the next few years due to NCAA credits, exit fees, and Big East hoops school deal for the name)

 

[UConnDan97]

You are looking at a few stray hundred k which amount to rounding errors and declaring that a premium. I am looking at a contract all in that is much less than what Seton Hall basketball gets and drawing the obvious conclusion that Boise wasn't offered nor paid a premium.

MWC has become such a bush league operation that they are allowing Boise to wear blue at home. You want to pay them and beg them to stay? Why not just give them a 12th player or allow them to hold on 3rd down. What a joke.

The premium was over a million dollars per team per year. That's not a rounding error. That's 14 million dollars of value. I'm not sure how much you want to attribute to SDSU, because they would have obviously been responsible for some of that value as well, but the idea that this is a negligible effect is preposterous.

I definitely agree with you that MW has become a bush league operation. I suspect that they preferred bush league over no league. If they didn't restructure with the sweetheart deal, it was a matter of time before they either lost Fresno and to us, or they went the way of the WAC and joined up with C-USA. Allowing Boise to sell their home games and allowing them to wear whatever they choose at home was a calculated attempt to stay in business...

 

[Hoophound]

If Boise struck coaching gold, then they have done it three times already (Dirk Koetter, Dan Hawkins, Chris Peterson - all greater than 0.72 winning percentages). You could even argue that they struck gold four times, since Houston Nutt was there the year before Koetter, and he went on to be quite successful at Arkansas.

As for the money / facilities thing; it constantly amazes me how many people forget that UConn is the flagship university for the state of Connecticut. If you believe that a few million per year shortfall will be allowed to be the death of us, you are kidding yourselves. We just got another 2 billion.....2 billion!!!....dollars approved for UConn, which was a decade after the UConn2000 program brought us 2.3 billion. And we are sitting here talking about the death of the university in 20 years and comparing it to BC.....c'mon now.

(let's not forget that UConn will make significantly more than 2 million per year for the next few years due to NCAA credits, exit fees, and Big East hoops school deal for the name)

They have struck gold 3 times. Anytime a school gets a great coach 3 times in a row, they are getting lucky. And again, they take all the great players that can't read while we can't take players that are even marginal.

As far as your "a few million" comment, it isn't a few million, its a 20-32 million dollar per year difference. That is massive. It's like Tolland High School trying to compete with UCONN.

 

[whaler11]

The premium was over a million dollars per team per year. That's not a rounding error. That's 14 million dollars of value. I'm not sure how much you want to attribute to SDSU, because they would have obviously been responsible for some of that value as well, but the idea that this is a negligible effect is preposterous.

I definitely agree with you that MW has become a bush league operation. I suspect that they preferred bush league over no league. If they didn't restructure with the sweetheart deal, it was a matter of time before they either lost Fresno and to us, or they went the way of the WAC and joined up with C-USA. Allowing Boise to sell their home games and allowing them to wear whatever they choose at home was a calculated attempt to stay in business...

Even after they sell the rights to a conf championship game the leagues total revenue is 20 million if they are lucky with 12 mouths to feed.

If Boise brought 14 million in value themselves they would be in the AAC and the AAC would have a 35 million dollar deal and Boise and everyone else would still be ahead. That would be a premium, not some league redistributing their deal to pay one team more than the others.

 

[UConnDan97]

They have struck gold 3 times. Anytime a school gets a great coach 3 times in a row, they are getting lucky. And again, they take all the great players that can't read while we can't take players that are even marginal.

As far as your "a few million" comment, it isn't a few million, its a 20-32 million dollar per year difference. That is massive. It's like Tolland High School trying to compete with UCONN.

First of all, it isn't 20 - 32 million dollars different. UConn's revenues this past year for the athletics department were what, something like 60+ million? You believe that BC is making 85 million? Our conference tv contract is 18 million lower (not 20-32), however, we still have contracts with IMG, Nike, SNY (women), as well as the exit fee money, NCAA credits, etc. Now you wanna show me again how it is 20 -32 million dollars different?

As for the "struck gold 3 times"......what can I say about that comment. Really...

 

[UConnDan97]

If Boise brought 14 million in value themselves they would be in the AAC and the AAC would have a 35 million dollar deal and Boise and everyone else would still be ahead. That would be a premium, not some league redistributing their deal to pay one team more than the others.

This is my point. A 35 million dollar deal with 14 teams would equate to 2.5 million for the Big East. However, Boise right now is going to get I believe 2.5 million from the CBS/ESPN contract, PLUS they are going to be able to sell home football games, PLUS they get a bonus 300k for every time they appear on a national broadcast:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...-san-diego-states-contract-with-mountain-west

So yes, I agree with your assessment that it would have been a 35 million dollar contract. No, I don't agree with your assessment that it means Boise would be in the AAC...

 

[woomba]

This is my point. A 35 million dollar deal with 14 teams would equate to 2.5 million for the Big East. However, Boise right now is going to get I believe 2.5 million from the CBS/ESPN contract, PLUS they are going to be able to sell home football games, PLUS they get a bonus 300k for every time they appear on a national broadcast:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...-san-diego-states-contract-with-mountain-west

So yes, I agree with your assessment that it would have been a 35 million dollar contract. No, I don't agree with your assessment that it means Boise would be in the AAC...

You're quoting an article whose numbers are old - the final fixed contract was smaller. The link I posted earlier has the correct figures.

The CSB/ESPN contract is only worth $1M per school and they have created a $6M annual pot for nationally broadcast games. Since Boise State has a guaranteed minimum of 3 games annually, they will clear around $2.1-$2.5M annually like I stated earlier. Technically BSU can clear up to $4M annually if every single one of their home games is broadcast on Saturday but that's not realistic nor the expectation.

The whole BSU's home games thing is confusing but basically it got rolled into the ESPN contract instead of being part of the original CBS contract so those numbers are all-in. Then from the ESPN contract they created the $6M bonus pool from which Boise is guaranteed at least 3 games from.

The only thing I think they haven't done yet is contracting out the rights to the MWC Championship game so I guess you can add another few 100k to that final number later.

 

[UConnDan97]

You're quoting an article whose numbers are old - the final fixed contract was smaller. The link I posted earlier has the correct figures.

The CSB/ESPN contract is only worth $1M per school and they have created a $6M annual pot for nationally broadcast games. Since Boise State has a guaranteed minimum of 3 games annually, they will clear around $2.1-$2.5M annually like I stated earlier. Technically BSU can clear up to $4M annually if every single one of their home games is broadcast on Saturday but that's not realistic nor the expectation.

The whole BSU's home games thing is confusing but basically it got rolled into the ESPN contract instead of being part of the original CBS contract so those numbers are all-in. Then from the ESPN contract they created the $6M bonus pool from which Boise is guaranteed at least 3 games from.

The only thing I think they haven't done yet is contracting out the rights to the MWC Championship game so I guess you can add another few 100k to that final number later.

Okay, so if I go with your article (which I'm fine with, because it is from the Idaho Statesman which covers Boise State), we are STILL looking at revenues for Boise greater than 2.5 million dollars! That's my point!

And the fact that they can get up to 4 million dollars, while the other teams in the league will only get about 1.2-1.4, tells you everything you need to know about Boise State's premium. On top of the fact that, as you've mentioned, they will likely get a few hundred thousand for the championship game, as well as the fact that the rest of their athletic teams do not have to be in the Big West, and it's clear why they are not in the AAC. And it's NOT because they wouldn't have added value...

 

[Hoophound]

First of all, it isn't 20 - 32 million dollars different. UConn's revenues this past year for the athletics department were what, something like 60+ million? You believe that BC is making 85 million? Our conference tv contract is 18 million lower (not 20-32), however, we still have contracts with IMG, Nike, SNY (women), as well as the exit fee money, NCAA credits, etc. Now you wanna show me again how it is 20 -32 million dollars different?

As for the "struck gold 3 times"......what can I say about that comment. Really...

Dan,
I'm not really trying to argue with you but....my 20-30 million comment is in reference to all the major conferences, not just the ACC. I know the B1G, B12 and SEC pay more than the ACC but im not sure exactly how much. Either way, the difference is staggering.

In regard to Boise, I consider their coaching hires good luck because I can't even think of another top program that has had 3 highly successful coaches in a row. Especially, one that doesn't pay huge money.

 

[woomba]

Okay, so if I go with your article (which I'm fine with, because it is from the Idaho Statesman which covers Boise State), we are STILL looking at revenues for Boise greater than 2.5 million dollars! That's my point!

And the fact that they can get up to 4 million dollars, while the other teams in the league will only get about 1.2-1.4, tells you everything you need to know about Boise State's premium. On top of the fact that, as you've mentioned, they will likely get a few hundred thousand for the championship game, as well as the fact that the rest of their athletic teams do not have to be in the Big West, and it's clear why they are not in the AAC. And it's NOT because they wouldn't have added value...

I'm not disagreeing with you in that they wouldn't have added value - I just don't think it would've added enough to justify jumping ship after MWC's renegotiation which essentially pays AAC-like numbers.

Also, the team that Boise plays against will also get that bonus pot (as well as the occasional national broadcasts from other MWC team), so the gap between the teams won't be that large . Essentially what will happen is that the top 3-4 teams in the MWC will clear a bit over $2M annually while the bottom feeders will clear closer to $1M.

 

[UConnDan97]

Dan,
I'm not really trying to argue with you but....my 20-30 million comment is in reference to all the major conferences, not just the ACC. I know the B1G, B12 and SEC pay more than the ACC but im not sure exactly how much. Either way, the difference is staggering.

In regard to Boise, I consider their coaching hires good luck because I can't even think of another top program that has had 3 highly successful coaches in a row. Especially, one that doesn't pay huge money.

And I don't want to come off like I'm attacking you. My comments are maybe less toward you and more toward the scores of fans on the BY who want to jump off of a bridge because of the conference situation. Don't get me wrong; I get the fact that we don't want to be at a monetary disadvantage to other schools in D-1. But if we are talking about the SEC and the BiG, I've got news for you; we've been making a lot less than those schools for quite some time. And we have shown that it has not affected our ability to compete at the highest level.

Will we ever be at BiG/SEC payout levels? Maybe not, unless we are in the B1G. However, I can't state it enough that we have a state and a state legislature that is 100% behind this university when it comes to financial support. That's why I'm less worried about the money and more worried about the new playoff system.

As for Boise, they may have been fortunate to find three in a row, but you have to admit that they are doing something very very right if they have talked that quality of coach to live in Idaho that many times in a row. That's a lot more than luck. Imagine what a school in the Tri-State area should be able to do to attract coaches...

 

[UConnDan97]

I'm not disagreeing with you in that they wouldn't have added value - I just don't think it would've added enough to justify jumping ship after MWC's renegotiation which essentially pays AAC-like numbers.

Also, the team that Boise plays against will also get that bonus pot (as well as the occasional national broadcasts from other MWC team), so the gap between the teams won't be that large . Essentially what will happen is that the top 3-4 teams in the MWC will clear a bit over $2M annually while the bottom feeders will clear closer to $1M.

I agree 100% with you. I understand why Boise didn't want to come to the AAC, once the MW agreed to structure the deal in their favor. At that point, there is no reason for Boise to come. My point throughout all of this was that Boise added financial value. So much so that the MW / CBS were willing to pull strings to flip them back...

 

[Jimdish255]

First of all, it isn't 20 - 32 million dollars different. UConn's revenues this past year for the athletics department were what, something like 60+ million? You believe that BC is making 85 million? Our conference tv contract is 18 million lower (not 20-32), however, we still have contracts with IMG, Nike, SNY (women), as well as the exit fee money, NCAA credits, etc. Now you wanna show me again how it is 20 -32 million dollars different?

As for the "struck gold 3 times"......what can I say about that comment. Really...

Colorado fans might say they got the wrong guy and it was Peterson that carried Hawkins.

 

[whaler11]

This is my point. A 35 million dollar deal with 14 teams would equate to 2.5 million for the Big East. However, Boise right now is going to get I believe 2.5 million from the CBS/ESPN contract, PLUS they are going to be able to sell home football games, PLUS they get a bonus 300k for every time they appear on a national broadcast:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...-san-diego-states-contract-with-mountain-west

So yes, I agree with your assessment that it would have been a 35 million dollar contract. No, I don't agree with your assessment that it means Boise would be in the AAC...

They wouldn't have 14 teams if Boise and SDSU didn't bail.

It looks like MWC gets 1 million a team plus the TV bonuses which will get Boise to 2.5. They only have 18 million total including the Boise home games. They expect to pay 6 million in bonuses.

 

[UConnDan97]

Colorado fans might say they got the wrong guy and it was Peterson that carried Hawkins.

That is a prime example of a person not understanding that the grass isn't greener. Colorado is an amazing story; they were on top of the football world about 25 years ago or so, and man, the mighty have fallen. I'm guessing it's less about Hawkins and more about the fact that he took over Colorado at a time when Texas and OU were on top of the world and TT, OSU, and TA&M were all really really good. Colorado's only saving grace were that they were in the Big12 North, which was infinitely weaker than the South. Still, it wasn't enough. And they aren't faring much better in the PAC...

 

[Marty Jackson]

The difference is Boise struck coaching gold. They also have no academic standards. Going forward, BC can afford to hire a big name coach. Boise can't, so they better keep getting lucky.

When our facilities become dated, we won't have money to rebuild, schools like BC will.

The big conference programs are making 10-20 times what we are. Look at that in everyday terms. If I make 100k per year and you make $2,000,000 don't you think our circumstances will look quite different? Furthermore, think about how different your life will be than mine 20 years from now. This is a problem that will compound over time.

The money issue can't be ignored... But in the grand scheme of the entire Uconn budget, $20M is not a deal breaker.
If uconn has made the decision to play and compete at the top level, they will find a way to cover the gap.

 

[jbdphi]

The 2013 Schedule is far better than any we have ever come close to.

Going forward?

OOC the schedule isn't horrible with Boise, BYU, Tennessee and Virginia. In conference, I know I'm cherry picking but if we played Houston, SMU, Cincinnati, USF, UCF, East Carolina,Navy and Temple every year, that's not a complete disaster.

 

[Srqhusky]

OOC the schedule isn't horrible with Boise, BYU, Tennessee and Virginia. In conference, I know I'm cherry picking but if we played Houston, SMU, Cincinnati, USF, UCF, East Carolina,Navy and Temple every year, that's not a complete disaster.

does anyone not agree the football side may have gotten overall stronger. We lost Syracuse and Pitt but picked up Ucf and Houston. Definitely a edge to the AAC. Louiseville and rutgers loss hurts but east Carolina and smu can fill there voids. Smu is on the way up. Talent rich state and they finished strong last year. East Carolina finished strong and had seven wins in their conference. Rutgers traditionally schedules easy ooc. Louisville could have had two more losses(don't tell that to all the people that think they are going undefeated this year). We are still a competitive conference football wise.

As far as Memphis. They don't care about academics so anything is possible with their growth. Also they won three of their last four and they can put points on the board.

 

[Hoophound]

does anyone not agree the football side may have gotten overall stronger. We lost Syracuse and Pitt but picked up Ucf and Houston. Definitely a edge to the AAC. Louiseville and rutgers loss hurts but east Carolina and smu can fill there voids. Smu is on the way up. Talent rich state and they finished strong last year. East Carolina finished strong and had seven wins in their conference. Rutgers traditionally schedules easy ooc. Louisville could have had two more losses(don't tell that to all the people that think they are going undefeated this year). We are still a competitive conference football wise.

As far as Memphis. They don't care about academics so anything is possible with their growth. Also they won three of their last four and they can put points on the board.

This is all true. However, UCONN will not bend on academics. That is going to make winning this conference much harder. We need to take kids that are a little more marginal academically and we need coaches that can win with them. I don't expect schools like Memphis, Houston and ECU to just bend over for us. This is going to be tough.

Ultimately, to gain respect for the conference all the programs need to win OOC. In order to pad the OOC record, we need to be smart in scheduling as well. If we're all playing the best of the big conferences it won't be pretty. We need to play some of their bottom dwellers to help keep our OOC record strong. I hope that conference leadership works with the schools to schedule smart so that we have the best chance to gain credibility and get a better contract.

 

[mattp]

I don't understand the obsession with money in amateur athletics. Are you suggesting that over the last 5 years BC has been more successful than Boise because they have made more money?

Probably for the same reason everyone keeps claiming that winning games is the key to moving conferences even though WVU is the only school added in the last ten years that actually won games. When the ACC originally raided the BE they were trying to take our best teams, nowadays there seems to be a negative correlation between winning and conference desirability.

 

[UConnDan97]

does anyone not agree the football side may have gotten overall stronger. We lost Syracuse and Pitt but picked up Ucf and Houston. Definitely a edge to the AAC. Louiseville and rutgers loss hurts but east Carolina and smu can fill there voids. Smu is on the way up. Talent rich state and they finished strong last year. East Carolina finished strong and had seven wins in their conference. Rutgers traditionally schedules easy ooc. Louisville could have had two more losses(don't tell that to all the people that think they are going undefeated this year). We are still a competitive conference football wise.

As far as Memphis. They don't care about academics so anything is possible with their growth. Also they won three of their last four and they can put points on the board.

If I'm being honest, I have to say that the football side has become worse. You can't lose West Virginia, Louisville, Pitt, Rutgers, and Syracuse, and expect to be better by adding UCF, Houston, East Carolina, SMU, and Memphis. You just can't. In the first group, you had a majority of teams that found themselves in the top25 over the last 3 years, whereas the second group really hasn't (Houston did with Keenum and UCF).

Having said that, I think that the football will be BETTER than most people think it will be. I don't think that this conference is the proverbial "s#it sandwich" that some of the BY have suggested it is. I think that there are strong football teams in the league, where many have demonstrated that they are turning their potential into results. Also, another fact that doesn't get talked about a lot is the AAC was able to keep its most successful football team over the last 8 years: Cincinnati. Most people think it would be WVU, but if you look at the conference titles and records, it's actually Cincy. They definitely need a better PR guy....kinda like we do!!!

 

[metsfan2323]

If I'm being honest, I have to say that the football side has become worse. You can't lose West Virginia, Louisville, Pitt, Rutgers, and Syracuse, and expect to be better by adding UCF, Houston, East Carolina, SMU, and Memphis. You just can't. In the first group, you had a majority of teams that found themselves in the top25 over the last 3 years, whereas the second group really hasn't (Houston did with Keenum and UCF).

Having said that, I think that the football will be BETTER than most people think it will be. I don't think that this conference is the proverbial "s#it sandwich" that some of the BY have suggested it is. I think that there are strong football teams in the league, where many have demonstrated that they are turning their potential into results. Also, another fact that doesn't get talked about a lot is the AAC was able to keep its most successful football team over the last 8 years: Cincinnati. Most people think it would be WVU, but if you look at the conference titles and records, it's actually Cincy. They definitely need a better PR guy....kinda like we do!!!

I agree with you about WVU, but I don't see any difference between SMU and Houston and Pitt and Cuse who have both been lousy in the Big East. UCF and ECU also have excellent football programs and recruiting for all of the CUSA schools should improve in the AAC.

We have gotten better in the sense that we now have more teams and an 8th conference game which is something the old league desperately needed. (I hope we go to 9) The national TV coverage is also going to improve and ESPN no longer has a reason to trash us, which is nice.

 

[Coach Flood]

I have a feeling that you guys are going to run the AAC every single year. If you win the conference a few times over the next 3 years then you'll get picked up pretty quickly by some other conference.