UMass > MAC for all sports in 2025-2026

[Jetskies]

I can't get over how bad this deal is.

there is SMU paying an arm to the ACC, then there's Memphis offering an arm AND a leg to P4 conferences

and then there's THIS. lol

 

[Rufus]

I can't get over how bad this deal is.

That implies it is bad for both sides. The MAC comes out ahead I think. Nothing to lose.

Not only do they get paid and all travel expenses covered, but the MAC TV deal is about to be renegotiated and they just added the 20th largest media market in the country to their offerings. Those Tuesday night MACtion games can now be double headers.

Horrible deal for Sac State for sure, but not the MAC.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

By flagship he is probably referring to the flagship of the CSU system. I don't think any particular school is known as the flagship the way Berkeley is of the UC system.

Setting aside UCLA, Cal, nearby UC Davis, and all of the far more academically respected UC schools, even within the Cal State system, highly commuter/non-traditional student Sac State’s a bottom feeder the likes of Fresno, Fullerton, San Bernardino, Northridge, Humboldt, SF St, LA St, etc. An academic joke compared with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, SDSU, Cal Poly Pomona, even Long Beach St, and San Jose St conveniently located in Silicon Valley.

 

[CL82]

there is SMU paying an arm to the ACC, then there's Memphis offering an arm AND a leg to P4 conferences

and then there's THIS. lol

I'm a little worried that if Connecticut gets an offer to joining a P conference at some point in the future, the whole "we will forgo distributions for X number of years" thing has now become the new expectation for joining.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Not umess, but good for less unlikable URI handing St. Louis U its 2nd loss of the season and 1st A10 loss. Rhody tried very hard to fail to win, but SLU ran out of time coming from behind. Not so impressed watching the Billikens last night, but maybe just a bad night.

 

[Vowelguy]

I can only imagine what it would cost to fly ~100 players, about a dozen or so coaches and another twenty staff members six times next fall. It's a good thing they're getting no revenue to defray some of these costs.

Flying 4 teams out to Sacramento … I’m guessing this will be about 1/2 million a year?

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

I'm a little worried that if Connecticut gets an offer to joining a P conference at some point in the future, the whole "we will forgo distributions for X number of years" thing has now become the new expectation for joining.

I think we've reached the point of AD valuations being dilutive to P4 conferences (other than ND and maybe a few others). It's going to cost us to get in.

 

[CL82]

I think weve reached the point of AD valuations being dilutive to P4 conferences (other than ND and maybe a few others). Its going to cost us to get in.

If we really are dilutive (great word choice, by the way), then no one will take us. I suspect, though even if we're additive, there may be a desire for us to forgo a distributive share, just as a cash grab by the existing members.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

If we really are dilutive (great word choice, by the way), then no one will take us. I suspect, though even if we're additive, there may be a desire for us to forgo a distributive share, just as a cash grab by the existing members.

Some added thoughts...

OR and WA were dilutive to the Big10 from the TV contract perspective but brought lots of other value so they were brought in at 50% share initially.

Stanford, Cal, and SMU: same thing.

We'll land at some point in the ACC (backfill/rebuild) and the ESPN valuation will go down so our valuation will be more in line with ACC media payout than we are now. Patience is needed.

 

[CL82]

Some added thoughts...

OR and WA were dilutive to the Big10 from the TV contract perspective but brought lots of other value so they were brought in at 50% share initially.

Stanford, Cal, and SMU: same thing.

We'll land at some point in the ACC (backfill/rebuild) and the ESPN valuation will go down so our valuation will be more in line with ACC media payout than we are now. Patience is needed.

Oregon and Washington added value, just not enough. They ended up receiving half shares, and at that rate didn't actually cost any existing Big Ten member any money. I think they are due to get full shares at the next contract.

ESPN paid the ACC, a full share for SMU, Stanford, California so their addition wasn't dilutive. Their not getting a full share in return just made the deal economically better for existing members, particularly in the case of SMU.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not disagreeing with your point. I just think of the word dilutive as meaning that an addition would reduce value on a per school basis.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The math doesn't need to be over complicated, if the net of conference revenues over expenses if we were to join a P conference meets or exceeds what remaining in the BE nets, it isn't even a question, regardless of whether the new conference revenues is a full share, a 60% share, a 40% share.....

I will go so far as to say that even if it is a slight net loss for a year or two it still would most likely be the intelligent move as a) the reduced revenues won't be permanent and b) there is reason to believe the BE will most likely continue to lose ground financially to other conferences.

 

[CTFAN4LIFE]

Oregon and Washington added value, just not enough. They ended up receiving half shares, and at that rate didn't actually cost any existing Big Ten member any money. I think they are due to get full shares at the next contract.

ESPN paid the ACC, a full share for SMU, Stanford, California so their addition wasn't dilutive. Their not getting a full share in return just made the deal economically better for existing members, particularly in the case of SMU.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not disagreeing with your point. I just think of the word dilutive as meaning that an addition would reduce value on a per school basis.

Yes, when I say dilutive I mean before any concessions are made. I think SMU/Cal/Stanford were technically dilutive but the ACC had the contractual right with ESPN to add them (and ESPN wasn't happy about it, but that's a whole different topic as we know, lol). Anyway, I think are lot of people get too hung up on the value that a school can bring to conference members' TV deal and fail to think about the value that a new market has for future students, the impact of donor fundraising from alumni in a prospective member's territory, research grant synergies, sponsorship synergies, and on and on. That kind of "extra" value is what will hopefully get UConn over the goal line and into the P* level.

 

[Da_Aisijimo_Gou]

Flying 4 teams out to Sacramento … I’m guessing this will be about 1/2 million a year?

Wait until umess and the rest of the MAC learn Sac St will not pay for charters. To/from Sacramento via commercial flights, MAC schools will minimally require at least 1 to 2 connections each way. Partial BSing, but easily humored by the scenario.

 

[Fishy]

That implies it is bad for both sides. The MAC comes out ahead I think. Nothing to lose.

Not only do they get paid and all travel expenses covered, but the MAC TV deal is about to be renegotiated and they just added the 20th largest media market in the country to their offerings. Those Tuesday night MACtion games can now be double headers.

Horrible deal for Sac State for sure, but not the MAC.

The MAC will realize nothing on their television deal by adding Sac State. Some of you are simply insane.

Assuming Sac State actually pays them anything, the MAC is being paid to babysit Sac State football for five years.

My guess is that they're bounced back to oblivion when the lease is up.

 

[Jetskies]

I'm a little worried that if Connecticut gets an offer to joining a P conference at some point in the future, the whole "we will forgo distributions for X number of years" thing has now become the new expectation for joining.

just assume it is - would you advise uconn to reject the offer?

(personally i dont think its a matter of "if" we'll forego money; it's how long are we willing/able to wait - at some point uconn has to put its foot down and stop getting kicked around by the p4 bullies. our basketball may not be more valuable than a top football program, but it's too valuable for a conference to pretend we are worth so little they can force us to forego payout money for the same duration Memphis/Tulane/USF would agree to.)

 

[UConnJim]

I think we've reached the point of AD valuations being dilutive to P4 conferences (other than ND and maybe a few others). It's going to cost us to get in.

Many conference additions have been due to the economics of that period. Rutgers was added because they added cable boxes for the Big Ten Network as captive cable boxes were the way most people got cable. Stanford, Cal, and SMU were added to the ACC due to captive cable boxes for the ACCN and they were willing to take a reduced share and in SMU's case a zero media share.

Sports are moving to streaming and captive cable boxes are slowly becoming irrelevant. And, the ACC is starting to compensate schools for their TV ratings with unequal revenue sharing. What happens when all schools start being compensated on their ratings or how many subscribers they bring to their conference streaming network? I would think UConn can support their value in a streaming world, but can all P4 schools?