adoraz wrote:Felt this deserved it's own thread, since this isn't just fan speculation (like in the expansion thread).
After Val's comments yesterday about the possibility of expanding to 11, the AAC sent out an urgent GOR request to all members this morning.
There are a lot of news articles, but for starters:
https://the-boneyard.com/threads/aac-gr ... ts.137263/
Especially around page 4 things get interesting.
Personally, I'd be happy to see them join. Just talks for now, but enough to get the AAC's attention.
xusandy wrote:"Yep. Like what we've said- if UConn wants in the Big East, it's a matter of seconds for them to get in." Stever, for once I agree with you: UConn is a second choice!
zebrapoodle23 wrote:I can see how it works, but these types of deals are going to be bad for the conference as a whole as well as the member schools. Even if you are one of the schools getting more money, the other schools in your conferences are going to fall behind even further.
Let's say you think UCF is a total facade because they play a shit schedule. Suddenly the TV deal is giving them 25% more more than Temple gets. If UCF does it again do people suddenly sit back and think "Oh hey they are for real now!"? No, people are just going to keep thinking the same.
The schools getting more money wouldn't get anywhere near what they could get in even a single year in a bigger conference, so if they think expansion could happen, it's a terrible deal.
The smaller schools trying to get security are screwed because the money from a Bigger conferences TV deal is so much bigger that you can probably break the GoR and still come out ahead in a year or two.
The only way this is a benefit if there is absolutely no expansion and no threat of expansion and somehow this is able to get more money from the networks in general. Having an earnings tier when all members re there from the start is a terrible idea that is only going to cause resentment when one of the "smaller" schools has a good run. The point of the conferences is to act together to support each other. f---ing some of the schools over because you can is a terrible way to run a conference.
Xudash wrote:zebrapoodle23 wrote:I can see how it works, but these types of deals are going to be bad for the conference as a whole as well as the member schools. Even if you are one of the schools getting more money, the other schools in your conferences are going to fall behind even further.
Let's say you think UCF is a total facade because they play a shit schedule. Suddenly the TV deal is giving them 25% more more than Temple gets. If UCF does it again do people suddenly sit back and think "Oh hey they are for real now!"? No, people are just going to keep thinking the same.
The schools getting more money wouldn't get anywhere near what they could get in even a single year in a bigger conference, so if they think expansion could happen, it's a terrible deal.
The smaller schools trying to get security are screwed because the money from a Bigger conferences TV deal is so much bigger that you can probably break the GoR and still come out ahead in a year or two.
The only way this is a benefit if there is absolutely no expansion and no threat of expansion and somehow this is able to get more money from the networks in general. Having an earnings tier when all members re there from the start is a terrible idea that is only going to cause resentment when one of the "smaller" schools has a good run. The point of the conferences is to act together to support each other. f---ing some of the schools over because you can is a terrible way to run a conference.
Excellent post.
Once upon a time, when I was involved in a financing for a regional fiber optics telco company - all this following the AT&T Divestiture decree in the early 80's - I asked the CEO about his competitive positioning, etc. His response has stuck with me forever: "From a network point of view, you're only as strong as your weakest link." He was specifically talking about throughput / bandwidth, but the point is made. Not to pick on Bowling Green (OH), but imagine the B1G if BGSU were a member and imagine an arrangement where top conference performers like Ohio State received much higher distributions than other members. Arrangements like that become self-fulfilling "prophecies" - the obvious haves swimming with the obvious and forever havenots.
More to the point, this was what life was like and probably still is like in the A10. The A10 had its poor institutional alignment problems when X was a member of it and it appears to continue to be stuck with very bad management and few options for strengthening itself today. Schools like Fordham and LaSalle can't get ahead of the curve because they can't get there financially. Fordham probably could get their from their own funding base if they wanted, but they lack the vision for it. Schools like St. Bonaventure and LaSalle are too far behind the financial power curve to play on the high-end.
The Big East is doing a great job of managing its overall strength by providing reasonable economic balance for its members.
GoldenWarrior11 wrote:Under the proposed GOR, UCF, USF, Cincinnati, Houston and Memphis would all receive higher television revenue payouts than the rest of the league. That means Aresco is effectively trying to sell the ****-canning of schools like Tulane, Tulsa, SMU, ECU and UConn as a way for the league to make more money and "force" long-term stability. Absolutely hilarious. We all have been told for years that football drives the bus. I guess it must be true. BEEP BEEP!
Return to Big East basketball message board
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 12 guests