Future of the ESPN Contract

We are about half way in on the contract. Do you think they will renew it? Do you think we will get paid better for the game? A little or a lot?

If we keep "performing" like the last two years, then no way we get renewed at the same price.

snoscythe wrote:
If we keep "performing" like the last two years, then no way we get renewed at the same price.

I disagree. ESPN doesn't care whether BYU wins or loses. They care about eyes on screens and BYU is bringing that. The only way our contract wouldn't get renewed is if ESPN isn't drawing viewers when BYU is on TV.

P5 contracts have seen big increases when they renewed. Will we see the same thing when it is our turn?

It is all about eyes on sets and it probably does not matter why people are watching as long as they are watching. Winning helps get people to tune in. Being part of the discussion comes from winning and creates viewers. They may watch because they love you or because they hate you or to scout you before you play them or track you after you play them. They may tune in to see your opponent. But they are still watching. Giving up good games to the road hurts that last point and a few others - our most interesting National Audience games have been on the road and thus outside our ESPY Deal.



win. Get ranked. Detractors, scouters, curiosity seekers and bandwagoners will show up in droves.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

scott715 wrote:
P5 contracts have seen big increases when they renewed. Will we see the same thing when it is our turn?

The contract renews in 2018. Look at the home schedules after that. BYU will get renewed with a much better deal. People complain about BYU always giving the first home game but that is part of the plan. BYU has already set the price for games they sell to ESPN until 2017. After that they are worth more.

jvquarterback wrote:

P5 contracts have seen big increases when they renewed. Will we see the same thing when it is our turn?

The contract renews in 2018. Look at the home schedules after that. BYU will get renewed with a much better deal. People complain about BYU always giving the first home game but that is part of the plan. BYU has already set the price for games they sell to ESPN until 2017. After that they are worth more.

and when those P5 schools continue to demand 2 for 1 on the next series and some like ND never quite get around to scheduling and playing the Provo games any time soon, if ever, the problem repeats itself. And we do not have the record to get in the discussion because we keep losing the road games.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

BYU has given 2-1 to USC and Wisconsin since independence. The bigger error in scheduling is the pair of one and dones with Michigan and Nebraska.



BYU is smart to take the first away game if they get a home game after 2017. It increases the value of their inventory when they go back to negotiate with ESPN.

Honestly, that's the best reasoning for deferring big home games for later I've heard yet.

So, the BYU-ESPN TV deal goes through the 2018 season and ESPN has an option for the 2019 season.



http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2010/09/Issue-244/College-Football-Preview/ESPN-BYU-Agree-To-Eight-Year-TV-Deal-For-Home-Football-Games.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Right now, BYU has Wisconsin, USC, and Boise St. on the 2019 home schedule. I think ESPN absolutely exercises its option for the 2019 season.



Here's the home lineup so far for the following 6 seasons (2020 through 2025).



2020- Arizona, Virginia

2021 - Arizona St., Boise St.

2022 - none

2023 - Stanford, Boise St.

2024 - none

2025 - Stanford

Plus, Notre Dame? (if we haven't hosted twice before 2019)



I think it's a little too early to tell whether ESPN looks to renew or increase the payout. If BYU can land home games with Michigan and Nebraska (H-H extensions of the current one-and-dones - ie, 2-for-1) and extend Utah, there's a great chance for renewal. The more P5 opponents, obviously, the better the payout will be.



So, TH, go extend the series with Texas, Notre Dame, USC, and UCLA.

Playing the "devil's advocate", what if the P5's spin off and form a new division and there becomes a clear path to delineate between the P5 teams and the rest. That could impact BYU's negotiating power as the overall product would not be as powerful. Sure we could have a great schedule but you could be playing as a "lower tier".



If there is a new division a full marketing front will take place for these teams. Teams not in the P5 will move lower in the food chain, really killing BYU. On top of that if 2015 and other years tend to be tough years that could also add to things.



If what others say about BYU being included in the new Division IV, that is great and I am for it. If we are not in it will be a huge detriment to BYU, not just negotiating with ESPN but to the brand in general.

If that does happen, I look forward to BYU dominating the non-P5 division.

I don't think it's a matter of "being included." The P5 will change the rules and requirements. Anyone that can follow the rules and meet the requirements will be allowed to participate - otherwise, you get into legitimate anti-trust territory.



Remember, the minimum rules and requirements will need to be low enough that the average and lower P5 schools can comply. So, you're not going to see 80k+ home game attendance required or budgets over $100 million or anything like that. There are only 20 or so programs that can come even near that. The P5 includes 65 or so universities.



What you will see is: full cost of attendance scholarships/player stipends, recruiting changes, initiatives that help players (limits on practice time, especially off-season, concussion, medical insurance, scholarship length, etc. (see the letter the PAC 12 president recently sent out)). BYU can and will make the changes and continue to compete. I would be surprised if there aren't 15-30 other Group of 5 schools that also follow the new Division 4 program (like the American and MWC).



Hopefully, it will trim down the top level of football to about 80-90 teams.

YNot wrote:
I don't think it's a matter of "being included." The P5 will change the rules and requirements. Anyone that can follow the rules and meet the requirements will be allowed to participate - otherwise, you get into legitimate anti-trust territory.



Remember, the minimum rules and requirements will need to be low enough that the average and lower P5 schools can comply. So, you're not going to see 80k+ home game attendance required or budgets over $100 million or anything like that. There are only 20 or so programs that can come even near that. The P5 includes 65 or so universities.



What you will see is: full cost of attendance scholarships/player stipends, recruiting changes, initiatives that help players (limits on practice time, especially off-season, concussion, medical insurance, scholarship length, etc. (see the letter the PAC 12 president recently sent out)). BYU can and will make the changes and continue to compete. I would be surprised if there aren't 15-30 other Group of 5 schools that also follow the new Division 4 program (like the American and MWC).



Hopefully, it will trim down the top level of football to about 80-90 teams.

That is one scenario. I have heard there are others with the P5 having there own division. They could still play other teams that are in D1.



I am not totally up the curve other than skimming a few articles, but it does not seem as clear cut as you mention.

NDCougar wrote:
That is one scenario. I have heard there are others with the P5 having there own division. They could still play other teams that are in D1.



I am not totally up the curve other than skimming a few articles, but it does not seem as clear cut as you mention.

If the P5 try to arbitrarily exclude others from competing in their division, that will lead to a major anti-trust lawsuit and a whole lot of political mess.



But, that's not what the P5 are doing. They are responding to the O'Bannon case, the Northwestern union vote, and related criticisms about the current system. And, legitimately, what makes sense for many of the P5 schools, doesn't make sense for North Texas, Eastern Michigan, or Southern Georgia. A little formal separation is a good thing, IMO. But, if North Texas gets some huge donations from a billionaire alumn and wants to go for it at the Division 4 level (meaning full compliance with player stipends and scholarship changes, health coverage, recruiting and transfer rule changes, etc.), the P5 won't get in the way.

Just so I'm clear, if Division 4 happens in football, the NCAA will look like this:



Division IV - highest level of NCAA football

Division III - lowest level of NCAA football

Division II - 3rd lowest level of NCAA football

Division I - 2nd lowest level of NCAA football

SpiffCoug wrote:
Just so I'm clear, if Division 4 happens in football, the NCAA will look like this:



Division IV - highest level of NCAA football

Division III - lowest level of NCAA football

Division II - 3rd lowest level of NCAA football

Division I - 2nd lowest level of NCAA football

Yeah, very confusing.



Add in they will come up with some stupid nickname for it, like NOT-BCS EXclusionary league.

YNot wrote:

That is one scenario. I have heard there are others with the P5 having there own division. They could still play other teams that are in D1.



I am not totally up the curve other than skimming a few articles, but it does not seem as clear cut as you mention.

If the P5 try to arbitrarily exclude others from competing in their division, that will lead to a major anti-trust lawsuit and a whole lot of political mess.



But, that's not what the P5 are doing. They are responding to the O'Bannon case, the Northwestern union vote, and related criticisms about the current system. And, legitimately, what makes sense for many of the P5 schools, doesn't make sense for North Texas, Eastern Michigan, or Southern Georgia. A little formal separation is a good thing, IMO. But, if North Texas gets some huge donations from a billionaire alumn and wants to go for it at the Division 4 level (meaning full compliance with player stipends and scholarship changes, health coverage, recruiting and transfer rule changes, etc.), the P5 won't get in the way.

The P5 may not overtly mention they are excluding other from competing but that is what they essentially do. They could set rules a certain way that would keep it very tough for the non-P5 to compete on the same level.......it has started (ACC and SEC). Not sure why everyone needs to be included if they have the P5 conference break off for their own division.



I am not expert, but just water cooler talk from NE (I am sure biased) folks.

Clearly the computer science people were not consulted on the new division naming. We would recommend naming the new division Division Zero. It preserves order, and sounds kind of cool...



You would have a slight issue with the roman numerals, though... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals#Zero" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;