What about just TV "Independence?"

Dick Harmon's article spells out the realities of BYU's TV situation and the MWC/WAC conundrum. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700059157/New-broadcast-facility-key-to-Ys-TV-dreams.html



"Last Wednesday in a teleconference call, MWC commissioner Craig Thompson stated the league would not entertain the idea of making concessions for any one member school. But after a talk with BYU president Cecil O. Samuelson on Thursday, he changed his tune and said the MWC has "shown a willingness to work through some TV issues" in an effort to prevent BYU from declaring independence. Will that be enough for BYU? It might." [Sounds like I might be getting my wish that BYU becomes in the MWC what Texas is in the Big 12(10)]



So, here is one scenario that could play out (with the help of some friends such as ESPN and USU and perhaps some other recently-not-so-friendly friends such as the MWC and Comcast):



1. BYU gets the "exposure" it needs by working out a deal with the MWC/Comcast to obtain "freedom to retain some broadcast rights, while another part is replaying games on BYU's own systems."



2. BYU stays in the newly created MWC 2.0



3. MWC 2.0 becomes MWC 2.1 by adding USU (need to do this to protect a friend that honored a commitment) and/or Hawai'i (a valuable addition? or just a mouth now looking for a meal?) as additional members and divides into divisions (perhaps giving BYU one or more additional non-conference games for its TV platform - and even more if there is a 13th additional regular season game on the years BYU travels to Hawai'i).



4. MWC adds a conference football championship game* (and while I'm dreaming the MWC moves its conference basketball championship to the Orleans in Vegas or better still to the home of the conference champion with the use of BYU's HD TV Truck and the resulting equipment rental check)



5. MWC and Conference USA arrange for a play-off of their champions* (sounds like the beginning of a broader based playoff arrangement to me - something college football fans are strongly in favor of and a big hole in the BCS dike)



6. The BCS gives AQ to the "playoff" winner now and perhaps to the MWC at the end of the pending qualifying period.* Or, better yet, the BCS dies in favor of a significant playoff format available to all. (Query: Is this one of the goals ESPN has in its mind as it takes over the BCS broadcasting rights? If the BCS is worth $$$ then a playoff is worth $$$$$$$$?)



*There seem to be several important benefits to MWC championship games and playoff games:



a. important media exposure, expecially if the participants are already on the minds of the voters in the BCS hunt - more exposure means the potential for higher votes which means more likelihood of BCS selection which means a higher likelihood of AQ status in the future

b. Significantly improved strength of schedule

b. Increased public awareness and acceptance especially on the East coast

c. $ generated by the game itself



All of these give BYU the exposure and additional funding it deserves and wants, could make the MWC more stable, profitable and a better fit for BYU now and in the future, and should give BYU options in the future - for example if the Texas Big 12(10) ever comes calling (with this in place, would we even accept an invitation?).

The MWC should reject any offer or notion that their champion should play in a pre-BCS game for an automatic BCS bid. No other non-AQ conference - now that Boise is one of us - has a resume even remotely close to the MWC's.

kitic77 wrote:
The MWC should reject any offer or notion that their champion should play in a pre-BCS game for an automatic BCS bid. No other non-AQ conference - now that Boise is one of us - has a resume even remotely close to the MWC's.

Of course you are correct. Wonder what Jerry Jones and ESPN will have to say about the MWC in the AQ process? http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/08/20/2416400/byus-plans-likely-wont-help-tcu.html



What are your thoughts about the other points I raise in the scenario?

I can't see how BYU can remain in the MWC and establish a relationship with ESPN.

kitic77 wrote:
I can't see how BYU can remain in the MWC and establish a relationship with ESPN.

Right you are again. And this is very important. Holmoe has said: "...the ultimate goal is exposure — which means partnering with a TV network like ESPN. Some of BYU's greatest games have been broadcast by ESPN, including the 1990 upset of No. 1 Miami. In last year's season-opener, the Cougars knocked off Oklahoma on ESPN. Holmoe points out that the first live college football game broadcast by ESPN was BYU's 1984, season-opening victory over Pittsburgh, which launched the Cougars' national championship season.We have a great relationship with ESPN," Holmoe said. "It's very difficult for us to get teams to come play us at the Marriott Center and LaVell Edwards Stadium. They don't want to come. They'll come if they're on ESPN. So that's the thing. We have a great relationship with ESPN and it will continue, regardless of how things go." http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700059156/Exposure-for-BYU-drives-push-to-independence.html?pg=2



As I said earlier, it would require MWC/Comcast approval for the BYU/ESPN marriage to work under the MWC umbrella - the proverbial "either you give me what I want or you don't get me at all."

I've heard a lot of "reports" and "sources" claiming that Thompson and the MWC now may be willing to allow BYU to have some TV independence while still remaining a member in some or all sports of the MWC. All these "reports" and "sources"--assuming they have any merit at all--have left me wondering: what has changed from Wednesday night to make Thompson want to help BYU out with TV Independence? Speculation and rumors aside, we know for sure these 4 things: 1) for the last few years, BYU has been working for some ability to broadcast/rebroadcast games on its own--with no success (Source: BYU AD); 2) Pres Samuelson went in front of all the other school presidents/Craig Thompson this past week and asked for redress of grievances concerning broadcasting issues--and was flat out turned down (Source: BSU AD); 3) BYU attempted to leave the MWC (independent in football and other sports to the WAC)--and was brutally shot down by Thompson/MWC (Source: USU AD); and 4) even if the MWC/Thompson/BYU all come together hand-in-hand and desired BYU's TV independence, the MWC/Thompson/BYU are still bound by a contract with Comcast--which Comcast has not renegotiated (Sources: Numerous). So, for all of you with "sources," what has changed to make Thompson want to work with BYU on TV independence? (Please don't say it's the threat of BYU leaving the conference--that obviously didn't work the first time.) And even if Thompson is willing to work with BYU, why would Comcast want to renegotiate its contract with the MWC? (And please don't say that the addition of a few WAC teams gets the MWC a free pass to void the contract and start over. Basic contract law states that you can't void a contract based upon an exigent circumstance that you yourself create--especially when it is foreseeable.)

BlueBaron wrote:
I've heard a lot of "reports" and "sources" claiming that Thompson and the MWC now may be willing to allow BYU to have some TV independence while still remaining a member in some or all sports of the MWC. All these "reports" and "sources"--assuming they have any merit at all--have left me wondering: what has changed from Wednesday night to make Thompson want to help BYU out with TV Independence? Speculation and rumors aside, we know for sure these 4 things: 1) for the last few years, BYU has been working for some ability to broadcast/rebroadcast games on its own--with no success (Source: BYU AD); 2) Pres Samuelson went in front of all the other school presidents/Craig Thompson this past week and asked for redress of grievances concerning broadcasting issues--and was flat out turned down (Source: BSU AD); 3) BYU attempted to leave the MWC (independent in football and other sports to the WAC)--and was brutally shot down by Thompson/MWC (Source: USU AD); and 4) even if the MWC/Thompson/BYU all come together hand-in-hand and desired BYU's TV independence, the MWC/Thompson/BYU are still bound by a contract with Comcast--which Comcast has not renegotiated (Sources: Numerous). So, for all of you with "sources," what has changed to make Thompson want to work with BYU on TV independence? (Please don't say it's the threat of BYU leaving the conference--that obviously didn't work the first time.) And even if Thompson is willing to work with BYU, why would Comcast want to renegotiate its contract with the MWC? (And please don't say that the addition of a few WAC teams gets the MWC a free pass to void the contract and start over. Basic contract law states that you can't void a contract based upon an exigent circumstance that you yourself create--especially when it is foreseeable.)

BYU leaving the conference is the main reason that all the parties are willing to talk.CT and Comcast realize that if BYU leaves the conference, the biggest source of reveune in the conference will leave. There are several other theads here that have stated that about 60% of all ads on the MTN are from Utah companies. Utah has left, which will hurt the how mush companies will pay for as time. If BYU leaves the confernce, all those companies will withdraw their money. Doing this will push the MTN into the red (or further into the red if they are already there.) The addition of Neveda and Fresno State will put the MTN on more sets, but will not offset the lose of BYU. This is all about the money, and brocasting BYU away games in conference, would be better for the MTN then not broadcasting any at all.

BlueBaron wrote:
I've heard a lot of "reports" and "sources" claiming that Thompson and the MWC now may be willing to allow BYU to have some TV independence while still remaining a member in some or all sports of the MWC. All these "reports" and "sources"--assuming they have any merit at all--

So is this a good enough source?



Dick Harmon's article spells out the realities of BYU's TV situation and the MWC/WAC conundrum. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700059157/New-broadcast-facility-key-to-Ys-TV-dreams.html



"Last Wednesday in a teleconference call, MWC commissioner Craig Thompson stated the league would not entertain the idea of making concessions for any one member school. But after a talk with BYU president Cecil O. Samuelson on Thursday, he changed his tune and [the MWC Commissioner] said the MWC has "shown a willingness to work through some TV issues" in an effort to prevent BYU from declaring independence."

kitic77 wrote:
I can't see how BYU can remain in the MWC and establish a relationship with ESPN.

It's really not that difficult to see how it could work out:



-Comcast/the mtn./MWC accept the fact that they need BYU, even if it means they lose 6 FB games a year (they'd still get 4 road games a year and all other sports).

-BYU negotiates with espn (I mean "they have already negotiated with espn"), which picks up a few of the games, leaving BYU to broadcast the remaining games or sells them to the mtn/vs./CBSCS

-BYU retains rebroadcast rights

-the mtn/vs/CBSCS broadcast the rest

-A new contract is drawn up with these terms



It's going to all come down to money. The one thing we all, including the MWC, comcast et al, need to realize is that BYU has a major non-sports interest in this process-exposure for the church. This is why independence actually could work and why it might be possible to force these types of concessions on the other parties involved.