This is not sustainable...

[ragtimejoe1]

I'm not sure where this goes or what the best answer is, but the huge discrepancy in revenue distribution in the MWC will kill it. The MWC was built on a foundation of equality and we know that model worked. This current set-up is not sustainable for schools other than BSU. It isn't bitching, whining or anything else. It is just my opinion that uneven revenue sharing kills a conference. I know it had to be done, but I don't think it can last.

One reason why we won't catch the AAC.

From BSU's SB Nation http://www.obnug.com/2015/12/11/9890690/boise-state-with-the-bulk-of-the-mwc-tv-payout" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[billings]

in a 30 -40 million dollar athletic budget $800,000 is not a huge difference.

 

[Coeur d' Alene]

in a 30 -40 million dollar athletic budget $800,000 is not a huge difference.

Exactly.

MWC is trying to take advantage of boises hot streak. Give it a chance.


Boise was a junior college until the 80's and it will prob be again. The state of Idaho can't support anything. Sure everybody love a winner, that's why there are so many Boise and Oregon fans in the northwest. They weren't here 15 years ago and they won't be here in 15

 

[Wyovanian]

in a 30 -40 million dollar athletic budget $800,000 is not a huge difference.

Exactly.

MWC is trying to take advantage of boises hot streak. Give it a chance.


Boise was a junior college until the 80's and it will prob be again. The state of Idaho can't support anything. Sure everybody love a winner, that's why there are so many Boise and Oregon fans in the northwest. They weren't here 15 years ago and they won't be here in 15

Exactly squared.

Give BSU Football some time. The post-Petersen decline is just beginning. When they're finishing fourth and fifth place, the revenue-sharing will be revisited.

 

[WyoBrandX]

While I don't necessarily agree with how the numbers were presented in that article, it is worth noting that Boise was averaging 645k viewers per game vs our 643k viewers per game.

We have a really large / and a very quiet fan base out there. I don't know why our administration doesn't try to sell that more. Boise has a larger fanbase, but we are (last I knew anyways) the second largest fanbase in the MWC.

Ours is definetely a national fan base - people come and go from wyoming. UW really should find someone who knows how to market that spin a bit better than they do now. Our administration makes us sound like the smallest - most remote - least interested fanbase in the MWC. Its simply not true.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

If $800K is no big deal, then why is it so hard to pay assistants more? If $800K is no big deal, then why is $200-$300K extra for recruiting such a big deal? The conference distributes on average about $4 million per team. $800K is nearly 25% of the conference distribution.

I get the BSU thing, but it doesn't matter which team is near the top. It likely will not rotate evenly so there will likely be substantial losers and winners over a 5 or 10 year span.

This is something that must be changed when the next round of TV negotiations occur. I don't think this is a good model for long-term success of the MWC. I'm definitely not advocating trying to renegotiate at this time; I'm advocating changing it in 3-4 years when our TV contract is up.

 

[Wicks]

While I don't necessarily agree with how the numbers were presented in that article, it is worth noting that Boise was averaging 645k viewers per game vs our 643k viewers per game.

We have a really large / and a very quiet fan base out there. I don't know why our administration doesn't try to sell that more. Boise has a larger fanbase, but we are (last I knew anyways) the second largest fanbase in the MWC.

Ours is definetely a national fan base - people come and go from wyoming. UW really should find someone who knows how to market that spin a bit better than they do now. Our administration makes us sound like the smallest - most remote - least interested fanbase in the MWC. Its simply not true.

Two things....

1) That 643k for Wyoming is not per game but a TOTAL for our 3 national TV games.

2) Ragtime is right and I can't believe no one else agrees. You can't have one school making twice the money than everyone else every year. It will destroy the conference and the reason we let BYU, Utah and TCU go is because they wanted more of the pie.

Texas making more money killed the Big 12 and forced Nebraska, Colorado and Mizzou to move conferences. This has to be fixed. Interms of TV Boise is pretty much operating as an independent with all their games on national TV

 

[Cornpoke]

I think the one thing that will bring back a little parity to all this is how millennial perceive watching TV. Most TV's already have internet capability. The days of hooking up to cable and satellite will be a thing of the past in 10 years. I remember growing up I had to watch Notre Dame games because that was the only option, ugh. We will never be forced to watch a game we don't want to again! Your TV is one big APP! You download what you want and watch whatever game you want on demand. On my amazon fire TV I just click on my ESPN TV app and their are nearly a 100 games I can choose to watch live. Guess what? I haven't seen a Notre Dame game in years. The Heisman trophy winner? I had never heard of him or seen him play.

With that being said, I also think we will see a shift from large Conference TV contracts to individual schools handling that side of it. What this will also bring is the collapse of Conferences because the glue holding them all together is TV $$$$$. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

 

[MrTitleist]

This deal has bugged me from day one. I don't like it one bit.

 

[WYCowboy]

This is not right and should be corrected.

 

[NebraskaCowboy]

The more realignment dies down, the harder the other schools need to push to get this changed. The conference did so much to get Boise back when they would've failed in the Big East that it wasn't even funny. If Boise doesn't like the demands consider telling them to go to hell and gtfo of the MWC.

 

[Wyokie]

This is not right and should be corrected.

I agree BUT it was done to keep Boise in the MW cos without them, bye-bye MW!

 

[billings]

While I don't necessarily agree with how the numbers were presented in that article, it is worth noting that Boise was averaging 645k viewers per game vs our 643k viewers per game.

We have a really large / and a very quiet fan base out there. I don't know why our administration doesn't try to sell that more. Boise has a larger fanbase, but we are (last I knew anyways) the second largest fanbase in the MWC.

Ours is definetely a national fan base - people come and go from wyoming. UW really should find someone who knows how to market that spin a bit better than they do now. Our administration makes us sound like the smallest - most remote - least interested fanbase in the MWC. Its simply not true.

Two things....

1) That 643k for Wyoming is not per game but a TOTAL for our 3 national TV games.

2) Ragtime is right and I can't believe no one else agrees. You can't have one school making twice the money than everyone else every year. It will destroy the conference and the reason we let BYU, Utah and TCU go is because they wanted more of the pie.

Texas making more money killed the Big 12 and forced Nebraska, Colorado and Mizzou to move conferences. This has to be fixed. Interms of TV Boise is pretty much operating as an independent with all their games on national TV

We did not let BYU, Utah or TCU go, too funny. There is not a damn thing we could have done to stop a move to a p5 even giving them the entire TV package. Nebraska moved for academic prestige as did CU. Big 12 teams make more money then CU does now from Big 12 versus PAC TV deals

They are not making twice what everyone else is making overall. SDSU and UNLV both have larger athletic budgets then Boise State

 

[billings]

This is not right and should be corrected.

I agree BUT it was done to keep Boise in the MW cos without them, bye-bye MW!

Without that deal we would be making less then we are now from TV to be sure.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

This is not right and should be corrected.

I agree BUT it was done to keep Boise in the MW cos without them, bye-bye MW!

I disagree, well at least it is TBD. We are nearing the end of the P5 dipping into the G5 ranks. I think once the B12 grabs a couple of teams out East, it will pretty much be over.

I also think the TV revenue is about to dry up or decline substantially. Even if it doesn't, the AAC won't garner that much more than the MWC no matter if BSU is in the MWC or the AAC.

BSU was critical at the time, but aren't really that important now. Make not mistake that the MWC is better with BSU, but there aren't any really good options for BSU once the P5 is done expanding. A best of the rest conference is nothing more than BS spouted by a bunch of whiny fans who are sour about being left behind. There simply won't be enough money in the G5 ranks to warrant large landscape changes.

 

[Wicks]

We did not let BYU, Utah or TCU go, too funny. There is not a damn thing we could have done to stop a move to a p5 even giving them the entire TV package. Nebraska moved for academic prestige as did CU. Big 12 teams make more money then CU does now from Big 12 versus PAC TV deals

They are not making twice what everyone else is making overall. SDSU and UNLV both have larger athletic budgets then Boise State

We did let them go because they wanted pretty much all of the TV money and wanted to call the shots in the conference. Remember the failed MW TV channel? You know who owned and organized it? BYU and Utah! And when it failed they jumped ship.

Every conference affiliation change of the past 10 years has been based on TV money. The Pac 12 and Big 10 make way more money than the Big 12, academic prestige had nothing to do with it.

 

[J-Rod]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/StalwartSt/status/675028658071863296[/tweet]

It's understandable that programs dislike the T.V. deal, but there is no guarantee that ESPN signs a lucrative deal without BSU's brand. Nobody cares about the other 11 programs...just a sad reality. Without BSU the MW gets the MAC treatment.

Boise State had a rough season. Their DC's inability to stop the option is baffling. That said, remove the name and brand...anywhere else where a team goes 8-4 (probably 9-4) with a rash of crucial injuries to key veterans, and start a true freshman QB who finished 1st-team All-MW, So. RB led the nation in TDs...only one year after winning a major bowl game, nobody would be forecasting a decline. 9-4 considering those circumstances is far from a death sentence. More like a rebuilding year with young talent.

Their DC has to get his shit together. They're good against 90% of schemes, but he's an idiot vs. the triple option. Undisciplined unit. That said, that team will be more than formidable going forward. Forecasting doom is more wishful-thinking than anything else. They're still recruiting really well and are poised for offensive juggernaut status. They just need to avoid the option like the plague.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Assume a couple of things:
1) Big12 grabs some combo of Cinci, Memphis, Houston.
2) The P5 is done dipping into the G5 ranks.
3) MWC TV is up for negotiations.

Now imagine BSU goes independent. How much money does BSU get on its own; how much does the MWC get; how much does the MWC + BSU get; how much does the AAC + BSU get?

My guess is there won't be enough money in any scenario to make a move palatable. Thus, the notion that BSU is doing the MWC a favor which justifies preferential treatment, while it might have been true before, is nothing short of ludicrous now.

 

[J-Rod]

Assume a couple of things:
1) Big12 grabs some combo of Cinci, Memphis, Houston.
2) The P5 is done dipping into the G5 ranks.
3) MWC TV is up for negotiations.

Now imagine BSU goes independent. How much money does BSU get on its own; how much does the MWC get; how much does the MWC + BSU get; how much does the AAC + BSU get?

My guess is there won't be enough money in any scenario to make a move palatable. Thus, the notion that BSU is doing the MWC a favor which justifies preferential treatment, while it might have been true before, is nothing short of ludicrous now.

I agree with this, but assumption #1 opens up a new can of worms. If that occurs, another chain reaction will begin for realignment. Some have suggested a "best of the rest" conference might form of the remaining AAC teams of MW schools. The best attempt to form a P6 conference. This is a "be careful what you wish for" type of situation. 2/3 of Houston/Memphis/Cincy leaving would cause chaos for the G5, and not good chaos.

 

[WyoBrandX]

While I don't necessarily agree with how the numbers were presented in that article, it is worth noting that Boise was averaging 645k viewers per game vs our 643k viewers per game.

We have a really large / and a very quiet fan base out there. I don't know why our administration doesn't try to sell that more. Boise has a larger fanbase, but we are (last I knew anyways) the second largest fanbase in the MWC.

Ours is definetely a national fan base - people come and go from wyoming. UW really should find someone who knows how to market that spin a bit better than they do now. Our administration makes us sound like the smallest - most remote - least interested fanbase in the MWC. Its simply not true.

Two things....

1) That 643k for Wyoming is not per game but a TOTAL for our 3 national TV games.

2) Ragtime is right and I can't believe no one else agrees. You can't have one school making twice the money than everyone else every year. It will destroy the conference and the reason we let BYU, Utah and TCU go is because they wanted more of the pie.

Texas making more money killed the Big 12 and forced Nebraska, Colorado and Mizzou to move conferences. This has to be fixed. Interms of TV Boise is pretty much operating as an independent with all their games on national TV

Ouch - thanks for pointing that out. I was just tossing numbers around too quickly without checking my work.