Assuming Hawaii gets done..Then what?

[Bullmastiff 1]

The CW for football did really well, especially the PAC games. Often outdrew FS1 regardless of who they showed, and often outdrew ESPN2 games which is crazy. Since ESPN 2 is always on by default at sports bars across the country when the CW defintely is not by default. Of courseas CBS sports network isn't listed.

Not counting regular CBS, that is a whole different ballgame, but rarely have MW games been elevated to that.

College Football TV Ratings

College football TV ratings for the 2024 regular season, bowls, College Football Playoff and National Championship.

www.sportsmediawatch.com

Real well..

As in Anything with Boise / OSU / WSU.

Everybody else not so much. Better than MWC games obviously but pretty pedestrian.

PAC will be extremely reliant on those three schools. USU brings nothing for viewership.

Interesting note. Rumored numbers for just WSU/OSU for CW next year is 7 million per school to broadcast 9 of their games.

So basically getting paid 1.3 million per game..

Would 32 total PAC games be a fair estimate for games CW covers? (Around 4 games per school?)

 

[dcut03]

So just looking at the big picture starting after the 5 MW schools leave, UNLV will get at least $15M, but could get as much as 20-30. Let's say they get $18M. They'll also get $5M annually from the media deal.

In that scenario, in the 6 years after the departing MW schools leave, UNLV will receive a total of $48 million. If they had left the MW, they also would have had to pay the exit fee, which we'll say is around $14M (guess). So in the end, the cost for UNLV to leave (for the next 6 years) would be $62 million.

If the PAC media deal is around 10-11 million per year, it would be close to a wash financially. If they get less, it's a net positive for UNLV in that 6 year period, at least financially. If they get more, it would be a net loss.

The other big thing that isn't clear is the ability for UNLV to go to a P4 conference, if that opportunity becomes available. In the MW, we get a free exit, if we go to a P4. The new PAC hasn't publicly given statement as to what their contracts say, so it's not really known if schools can exit the PAC for a P4 conference free of penalty or not.

A couple of things that Grok may not be accounted for. None of the articles really talk about the negotiation of fees. Time and time again, they are get negotiated, and that is without lawsuits. It is hard to think that bringing lawyers will help the MW otherwise conferences would force lawsuits all the time to retain more money.

The max lump sum is 14 mill. Most of that is coming from the 55 mil in the poaching fees which could be significantly slashed or possibly even thrown out completely. There is no way we get a 15 mill lump sum at this point. 5-10 maybe. I could be less than that.

After that it is based soley off of exit fees moving forward. The max was 1.8 per year. Now the MW had some wiggle room for negotiated exit fees, but considered how heavily contested these are, I wouldn't count on more than 1.5 extra per year. IT could be as low as 1.0 extra per year. And that expires after 6 years. There were stipulations that UNLV would get a greater percentages of any leftovers, but any leftovers seem extremely unlikely;

So I think over the next 7 years UNLV may take home anywhere from 11 mil- 19 mill extra. It could be less that that range, but unlikely if it is OVER that, though it could be.

I think that the PAC could easily be have 4-5 more per year just media before the bonuses. It wouldn't take long to break even.

You then have to consider the exit fee cost to UNLV to jump ship, but like I mentioned before RIGHT NOW? I think the PAC offers a good amount where the cost to UNLV could be as low as a few mil if not a net zero after exit fees get negotiated down.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

That was 5 years ago. Things have changed significantly since then. There is general inflation, but media values have gone crazy above and beyond inflation. I used those numbers to show general value for the time since we knew what the payouts

I think currently can easily be over 12, the other top 3 be 9-10, and UNLV 8. Utah State maybe 5-6. And this is raw media value, not counting CFP payouts.

The other thing that you don't acknowledge is the WAR of UNLV. It isn't that UNLV at 8 mil is going to drive up payouts by itself, it is the fact that it replaces a school worth likely less than 2 mil. That swing is what makes UNLV potentially so valuable. If they already had their 8 we would be less valuable. As I showed with my math previously that swing could drive up payouts up to nearly a million per school by taking UNLV over a token flyer on a school that just isn't at the same caliber of the rest of the schools right now ( Like a Texas State).

Yes and media companies are risk adverse.

You're the CW are you willing to pay top dollar for a product when you know 4 if not 5 of the schools in this conference are potential realingment targets? OSU / WSU / BOISE / SDSU / CSU could all bolt at a moments notice.

Unless the PAC sends UNLV a boat load of cash to pay exit fees UNLV isn't leaving. Unless PAC media is 10 million there's no reason to leave. If UNLV saddled themselves with 17 million in exit fees it would take 9 million per in media rights for UNLV to break even over 5 years.

If PAC was near 15 million the AAC 4 would have jumped.

I'll go back to quotes from every AD asked about why they rejected the offer.

It was a bad offer.

The media projections were viewed as overly optimistic when compared to the current AAC deal (With Houston Cincy SMU and UCF in the fold when that deal was created)
They had concerns over the stability and viability of the PAC.

The fact they publicly laid out why vs going canned answer of 'Simply not in our best interest' 'Or ' When weighing the travel we did not feel it woild be fair to our student athletes.'

Instead they to a person laid out exactly why and the Memphis AD going so far as to call it a bad deal.

Translation..

The my felt the PAC estimates of 15 million per school were horse dung.

I'll stand by between 8.5 to a max of 10.

MWC will come in at about 2.5 to 3.5. Inflation...

 

[dcut03]

Yes and media companies are risk adverse.

You're the CW are you willing to pay top dollar for a product when you know 4 if not 5 of the schools in this conference are potential realingment targets? OSU / WSU / BOISE / SDSU / CSU could all bolt at a moments notice.

The CW? Yes.

Reason 1, 2 of their top 3 markets were left in the dust. The likelihood they get elevated is somewhat low.

Reason 2: They really want to get in the college football business. I think this more than anything is why the PAC decided to build from scratch vs a reverse merger. They had really good early returns and wanted to capitalize. Reverse Merger? Less business for the Cee Dub most likely

Because of this I think they are willing to pay over conventional market value. Which is why we heard 12-15 when it was just them. A team's market value is what a media partner is willing to pay. They take on the risk of over paying. ESPN did this on a much bigger scale with the SEC and ACC. They laid off a lot, but were willing to do so.

Reason 3: Boise is a flight risk, but they haven't made a jump for a reason. Small market, bad academics. Up until last year, they have been dropping in quality. Are they back? Maybe. The others aren't big flight risks. CSU and SDSU are. Just like MW to UNLV, it is worth the risk of offering the free pass since the likelihood is realistically low. But I can see UNLV being the biggest risk of the west. Biggest investment in football outside of the P4, best location, etc.

 

[dcut03]

The CW? Yes.

Reason 1, 2 of their top 3 markets were left in the dust. The likelihood they get elevated is somewhat low.

Reason 2: They really want to get in the college football business. I think this more than anything is why the PAC decided to build from scratch vs a reverse merger. They had really good early returns and wanted to capitalize. Reverse Merger? Less business for the Cee Dub most likely

Because of this I think they are willing to pay over conventional market value. Which is why we heard 12-15 when it was just them. A team's market value is what a media partner is willing to pay. They take on the risk of over paying. ESPN did this on a much bigger scale with the SEC and ACC. They laid off a lot, but were willing to do so.

Reason 3: Boise is a flight risk, but they haven't made a jump for a reason. Small market, bad academics. Up until last year, they have been dropping in quality. Are they back? Maybe. The others aren't big flight risks. CSU and SDSU are. Just like MW to UNLV, it is worth the risk of offering the free pass since the likelihood is realistically low. But I can see UNLV being the biggest risk of the west. Biggest investment in football outside of the P4, best location, etc.

Wh like to shit on the PAC2, it is fun. But for the CW? The lowly leftover PAC 2 often did much better if not always better than their ACC games. Even with the disadavantage of being on the west coast.

Now the ACC games on the CW were often bottom feeders, but the PAC 2 were supposed to be worse than that, right? But they weren't, which means their value is probably much higher than most give them credit for.

Also shows the quality of their teams and even the PAC name, even at a shell of it's previous iteration.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

The CW? Yes.

Reason 1, 2 of their top 3 markets were left in the dust. The likelihood they get elevated is somewhat low.

Reason 2: They really want to get in the college football business. I think this more than anything is why the PAC decided to build from scratch vs a reverse merger. They had really good early returns and wanted to capitalize. Reverse Merger? Less business for the Cee Dub most likely

Because of this I think they are willing to pay over conventional market value. Which is why we heard 12-15 when it was just them. A team's market value is what a media partner is willing to pay. They take on the risk of over paying. ESPN did this on a much bigger scale with the SEC and ACC. They laid off a lot, but were willing to do so.

Reason 3: Boise is a flight risk, but they haven't made a jump for a reason. Small market, bad academics. Up until last year, they have been dropping in quality. Are they back? Maybe. The others aren't big flight risks. CSU and SDSU are. Just like MW to UNLV, it is worth the risk of offering the free pass since the likelihood is realistically low. But I can see UNLV being the biggest risk of the west. Biggest investment in football outside of the P4, best location, etc.

SDSU was nearly in the Big12 a couple years ago.

CSU would lock down the entire state of Colorado for Big12. Much like Utah / BYU and Utah.

WSU/OSU/BOISE good numbers.

Fresno/SDSU/USU no.

Again media companies are risk adverse.

I just posted the estimate for WSU / OSU is 7 million each to cover 9 games. Around 1.3 million per games.

That gives you a lens at what the games are worth. About 1.3 million.

Multiply that times how many total PAC games you think the CW will carry lets say 42 for the season.
.I bet you get close to the number the PAC will get for the football portion of media deal.

Exact science definitely not. But I bet it's ballpark. Around 6 million per school for football portion of media deal and another 3 million for basketball portion. I don't think CW will be carrying basketball. I'm guessing TNT maybe Tru TV.

9 million 10 max.

Anymore than that and they are getting Big East type money for basketball.

 

[dcut03]

SDSU was nearly in the Big12 a couple years ago.

CSU would lock down the entire state of Colorado for Big12. Much like Utah / BYU and Utah.

WSU/OSU/BOISE good numbers.

Fresno/SDSU/USU no.

Again media companies are risk adverse.

I just posted the estimate for WSU / OSU is 7 million each to cover 9 games. Around 1.3 million per games.

That gives you a lens at what the games are worth. About 1.3 million.

Multiply that times how many total PAC games you think the CW will carry lets say 42 for the season.
.I bet you get close to the number the PAC will get for the football portion of media deal.

Exact science definitely not. But I bet it's ballpark. Around 6 million per school for football portion of media deal and another 3 million for basketball portion. I don't think CW will be carrying basketball. I'm guessing TNT maybe Tru TV.

9 million.

SDSU has had good numbers historically. They were selected OVER Boise to join the PAC 2 seasons ago. Part of that is academics, for sure, but SDSU has had their worst 2 year run in nearly 20 years these past 2 years. The Big East wanted them when they were still trying to hold on to football. Their potential is high, this past year notwithstanding.

Their attendance numbers have taken a hit, but it hasn't been bad, their 2 year average has been somewhat close to ours, and this is the best 2 year stretch we have had in the history of the program.

Fresno averages some of the best attendance in G5, especially in the west. They have an audience. Their potential is high.

CSU is definitely the Danny Devito of the Colorado "Twins". Potential, yes. But I don't think the Big 12 would want them. Doesn't move the needle a bunch or really help them at all to "lock up the state". It is the same as the UW/Oregon thing with the B10.

The PAC was having talks with Fox, CBS, and ESPN just a few weeks ago. Having multiple interest can likely jump up the value and would contribute much more than TNT. ESPN really likes having Gonzaga for instance.

So 1.3 mil per game. Say an average of 3 games per week for 12 weeks. That is 5.85 per team for football alone for CW alone. 1-2 games for CBS, Fox, or ESPN will drive that up further. Again football alone.

I agree with your numbers 9 million sounds good for base media value. Then you add the probably 2.0 million CFP per team for a 8-9 team football league for football and that is 11 mil in total value.

MW is targeting their old contract 3.6 + 1.6 in CFP or so for a more diluted league 5.2 total.

5.8 more per year. Exit fees will not be anything more than 11 mil per team. That is the high end of every comp in the past 4-5 years in the same situation. Excluding SMU since they are weirdos and are not concerned about money. Break even point < 2 years and that is without any help from the PAC.

That doesn't include the bonuses besides CFP. More money if UNLV makes the playoffs (which is actually reasonable). More teams likely to make the dance and definitely more likely to advance. So a 1/2 share of significantly more creditsis still a good deal. Half share of making the playoff money is better than no share at all if we don't make it out of the MW. PAC will be in the driver's seat for the G5 inclusion especially with UNLV.

It also doesn't include bonus from the MW to be fair. But after 6 years they all go away. The amount is in significant contention too. But netting nearly 6 mil more per year? even 10 up front and a measly 1.5 for 6 years after that certainly doesn't seem worth it.

 

[Masked_rebel]

I 100% don't believe Boise is "back"... I 100% believe they rode a singular generational college player to the CFP with an OC that knew exactly what to do with him... I think Danielson has alot to answer now that their long time OC isn't there to guide him and 35 carries a game Jeanty is there to carry them...

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

SDSU has had good numbers historically. They were selected OVER Boise to join the PAC 2 seasons ago. Part of that is academics, for sure, but SDSU has had their worst 2 year run in nearly 20 years these past 2 years. The Big East wanted them when they were still trying to hold on to football. Their potential is high, this past year notwithstanding.

Their attendance numbers have taken a hit, but it hasn't been bad, their 2 year average has been somewhat close to ours, and this is the best 2 year stretch we have had in the history of the program.

Fresno averages some of the best attendance in G5, especially in the west. They have an audience. Their potential is high.

CSU is definitely the Danny Devito of the Colorado "Twins". Potential, yes. But I don't think the Big 12 would want them. Doesn't move the needle a bunch or really help them at all to "lock up the state". It is the same as the UW/Oregon thing with the B10.

The PAC was having talks with Fox, CBS, and ESPN just a few weeks ago. Having multiple interest can likely jump up the value and would contribute much more than TNT. ESPN really likes having Gonzaga for instance.

So 1.3 mil per game. Say an average of 3 games per week for 12 weeks. That is 5.85 per team for football alone for CW alone. 1-2 games for CBS, Fox, or ESPN will drive that up further. Again football alone.

I agree with your numbers 9 million sounds good for base media value. Then you add the probably 2.0 million CFP per team for a 8-9 team football league for football and that is 11 mil in total value.

MW is targeting their old contract 3.6 + 1.6 in CFP or so for a more diluted league 5.2 total.

5.8 more per year. Exit fees will not be anything more than 11 mil per team. That is the high end of every comp in the past 4-5 years in the same situation. Excluding SMU since they are weirdos and are not concerned about money. Break even point < 2 years and that is without any help from the PAC.

That doesn't include the bonuses besides CFP. More money if UNLV makes the playoffs (which is actually reasonable). More teams likely to make the dance and definitely more likely to advance. So a 1/2 share of significantly more creditsis still a good deal. Half share of making the playoff money is better than no share at all if we don't make it out of the MW. PAC will be in the driver's seat for the G5 inclusion especially with UNLV.

It also doesn't include bonus from the MW to be fair. But after 6 years they all go away. The amount is in significant contention too. But netting nearly 6 mil more per year? even 10 up front and a measly 1.5 for 6 years after that certainly doesn't seem worth it.

If PAC comes in North of 10 million UNLV made a huge mistake.

Unless the BIG12 is a real possibility and they saw no point in spending millions just to leave in 3-5 years.

 

[RebelScrub]

Holding our collective breath!!

 

[Masked_rebel]

Its going to be harder to find a Pac 12 game than a game during the NCAA tournament on TrueTV

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

Its going to be harder to find a Pac 12 game than a game during the NCAA tournament on TrueTV

I don't think UNLV is completely off the table for the PAC.

FOX could decide to carry PAC games it could push MWC football games to a less than desirable outlet.

FOX is getting a greatly reduced product in the new MWC. We can crap on the PAC all we want but their tv numbers were significantly better than MWC schools.

The next few days could be really interesting.

I've been down on the PAC potential in regards to a media deal however MWC could get what they were getting but with inflation that 3.6 to 4 million isn't worth what it was a few months a few years ago.

I still don't think PAC gets enough to compensate Memphis / Tulane to join but they could get numbers good enough to get UNLV to reconsider.

MWC hasn't re-upped with FOX as of yet and haven't announced their own deal either.

 

[LVRebel2000]

I don't think UNLV is completely off the table for the PAC.

FOX could decide to carry PAC games it could push MWC football games to a less than desirable outlet.

FOX is getting a greatly reduced product in the new MWC. We can crap on the PAC all we want but their tv numbers were significantly better than MWC schools.

The next few days could be really interesting.

I've been down on the PAC potential in regards to a media deal however MWC could get what they were getting but with inflation that 3.6 to 4 million isn't worth what it was a few months a few years ago.

I still don't think PAC gets enough to compensate Memphis / Tulane to join but they could get numbers good enough to get UNLV to reconsider.

MWC hasn't re-upped with FOX as of yet and haven't announced their own deal either.

With the Grant of Rights that UNLV signed, I'm not sure if it is an option or not to go to the PAC at this point. Unless there was something in the GOR that gives unlv an out if some conditions aren't met.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

With the Grant of Rights that UNLV signed, I'm not sure if it is an option or not to go to the PAC at this point. Unless there was something in the GOR that gives unlv an out if some conditions aren't met.

What I'm curious about is this and it's similiar to something @dcut03 brought up in the past.

UNLV signed a GOR for 2026 to 2032.

That media deal hasn't been finalized. And I'm not sure on the verbiage of the document.

What I'm getting at is could UNLV get out before 2026 or sue (seems to be the thing now) to try and get it reduced?

Im still in the camp the PAC probably won't get to a number that makes sense for UNLV to leave. But if they did and were willing to cover enough of UNLVs exit fees maybe it's feasible.

Memphis and Tulane etc would be need minimum 2 million more in media rights than UNLV to cover travel. I think that's what will ultimately keep them in AAC (I could be wrong maybe the PAC gets what they need)

I really don't think the PAC wants Texas State. It would be a desperation move for them.

In its current configuration MWC will be lucky to get 4 million. About what they had before but realistically less with inflation.

Short of it I don't know how it's going to play out but I think it's a more fluid scenario than it appears on the outside.

 

[LVRebel2000]

What I'm curious about is this and it's similiar to something @dcut03 brought up in the past.

UNLV signed a GOR for 2026 to 2032.

That media deal hasn't been finalized. And I'm not sure on the verbiage of the document.

What I'm getting at is could UNLV get out before 2026 or sue (seems to be the thing now) to try and get it reduced?

Im still in the camp the PAC probably won't get to a number that makes sense for UNLV to leave. But if they did and were willing to cover enough of UNLVs exit fees maybe it's feasible.

Memphis and Tulane etc would be need minimum 2 million more in media rights than UNLV to cover travel. I think that's what will ultimately keep them in AAC (I could be wrong maybe the PAC gets what they need)

I really don't think the PAC wants Texas State. It would be a desperation move for them.

In its current configuration MWC will be lucky to get 4 million. About what they had before but realistically less with inflation.

Short of it I don't know how it's going to play out but I think it's a more fluid scenario than it appears on the outside.

Those are good questions and I have no idea of the answers. Has the actual agreement been published?

 

[Meister_Rebel]

Those are good questions and I have no idea of the answers. Has the actual agreement been published?

I posted a link to the GOR here earlier. Quite possibly this thread.

To your earlier post, there is no specific discussion in the GOR that discusses anything that if the MWC fails to pay us any bonus money we can leave. Leaving for a P4 conference is our only out. Sure we can try and sue but, the bullshit GOR that we signed seems to have locked us down. I say bullshit because we signed our lives away without any guarantees if they don't pay. I've mentioned this before but people don't want to believe it. So, I posted the GOR for all to read so one can see for themselves.

 

[dcut03]

If PAC comes in North of 10 million UNLV made a huge mistake.

Unless the BIG12 is a real possibility and they saw no point in spending millions just to leave in 3-5 years.

That's the thing, the up front cost could be marginal or a net zero.

Again the going rate for exit fees is about 2 years media value. I use the AAC as the best comp since they are the most similar conference to the MW. That is what they settled on, and they were facing fees up to 45 mil a piece before they settled.

So 11 mil is likely the tippy top. 10 is more realistic since we only made 6 last year due to the scheduling agreement with the PAC 2. It could be as low at 7.2 as that is the 2 year base media value.

I know you question it, But I know I heard Harper say the PAC offered 6 mil for exit fees at a press conference. Which makes sense. The worst part of the AAC teams was the 2.5 million dollar offer, and they knew they had to do better. They are at their most desperate now where I think they could easily pay.

The language of GOR definitely made it seem much more difficult to get out of the MW. It had specific language that we agree to stay even if we don't any of the money we were promised. There is no duress argument since this was signed well after the initial agreement and all of the risk was definitely known vs signing back in the fall.

If we can get out successfully if the lawsuits heavily favor the PAC that would be great, but I am very doubtful at that at this point.

The onlt thing favoring UNLV right now is that the PAC still needs an 8th. As soon as they get one, the door will be shut. It feels like that UNLV is their first choice right now, and could be why they don't have an 8th. I keep seeing posts about UNLV to the PAC elsewhere. There may be some smoke there, but at least right now there seems to be too many hurdles to clear

 

[dcut03]

I posted a link to the GOR here earlier. Quite possibly this thread.

To your earlier post, there is no specific discussion in the GOR that discusses anything that if the MWC fails to pay us any bonus money we can leave. Leaving for a P4 conference is our only out. Sure we can try and sue but, the bullshit GOR that we signed seems to have locked us down. I say bullshit because we signed our lives away without any guarantees if they don't pay. I've mentioned this before but people don't want to believe it. So, I posted the GOR for all to read so one can see for themselves.

This was my biggest gripe. Why seemingly sign your life away to the MW, the objectively weaker conference, when we had all of the leverage. We should have said no, and waited to see what happens with some of these lawsuits. We could have had the PAC pay our fees most likely.

If the MW came out nicely with the lawsuits and it really looked like we would get a nice bonus, then sure sign the GOR later. It just seems dumb to sign this right now with so much uncertainty.

It hurt even more if the report was true that Whitfield helped write the GOR document. WTF is that all about?

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

That's the thing, the up front cost could be marginal or a net zero.

Again the going rate for exit fees is about 2 years media value. I use the AAC as the best comp since they are the most similar conference to the MW. That is what they settled on, and they were facing fees up to 45 mil a piece before they settled.

So 11 mil is likely the tippy top. 10 is more realistic since we only made 6 last year due to the scheduling agreement with the PAC 2. It could be as low at 7.2 as that is the 2 year base media value.

I know you question it, But I know I heard Harper say the PAC offered 6 mil for exit fees at a press conference. Which makes sense. The worst part of the AAC teams was the 2.5 million dollar offer, and they knew they had to do better. They are at their most desperate now where I think they could easily pay.

The language of GOR definitely made it seem much more difficult to get out of the MW. It had specific language that we agree to stay even if we don't any of the money we were promised. There is no duress argument since this was signed well after the initial agreement and all of the risk was definitely known vs signing back in the fall.

If we can get out successfully if the lawsuits heavily favor the PAC that would be great, but I am very doubtful at that at this point.

The onlt thing favoring UNLV right now is that the PAC still needs an 8th. As soon as they get one, the door will be shut. It feels like that UNLV is their first choice right now, and could be why they don't have an 8th. I keep seeing posts about UNLV to the PAC elsewhere. There may be some smoke there, but at least right now there seems to be too many hurdles to clear

I really don't know.

I think the AAC schools are off the table. Their exit fees are high, costs of travel skyrockets. Could it happen? Maybe, Never say never and all that. But seems like it could have gotten done it would be done by now.

There just aren't a lot of viable options out west.

One thing about the GOR.

Question really. The GOR we signed was for the 2026 season to 2032 correct?

The MWC currently hasn't renewed its contract or have its media deal finalized as of yet for 2026 and beyond.

Does that open the door at all for UNLV?

 

[RebelinWA]

Lets play around with a large language model that I have been developing to figure out what is the total cost of UNLV to leave the mountain west. Everything represented in the graph is coming from my program.

I am including a 3% inflation rate into these models as a baseline. If I knew what the actual inflation rate would be, I would be a wizard and I wouldn't be wasting my time on this scenario. I would have already just given UNLV the money to exit.

So lets start with our baseline cost to leave.

Component	Amount (in Millions USD)
Exit Fee	$17.0
Poaching Distribution Loss (24.5%)	$12.0
Annual Loyalty Guarantee Loss (7 years * avg. $1.65M)	$11.55
Total Cost to Leave	$40.55M

From there lets do a projection assuming the mountain west is getting 4.5m per school, and the Pac is getting 8m.

Year	MWC Payout (Adj.)	Pac-12 Payout (Adj.)	MWC Cumulative	Pac-12 Cumulative	Net Gain/Loss vs MWC	Net Gain/Loss vs $40.55M Cost
2026	$4.50	$8.00	$4.50	$8.00	$3.50	- $32.55
2027	$4.64	$8.24	$9.14	$16.24	$7.10	- $24.31
2028	$4.77	$8.49	$13.91	$24.73	$10.82	- $15.82
2029	$4.92	$8.74	$18.83	$33.47	$14.64	- $7.08
2030	$5.06	$9.00	$23.89	$42.47	$18.58	$1.92
2031	$5.22	$9.27	$29.11	$51.75	$22.64	$11.20
2032	$5.37	$9.55	$34.48	$61.30	$26.82	$20.75

Break even point is around 2030 in this scenario, or just before projected conference realignment

Now lets assume we can negotiate exit fees down to 30.5m and run the projections again.

Year	MWC (Adj.)	Pac-12 (Adj.)	MWC Cumulative	Pac-12 Cumulative	Pac-12 Net Gain/Loss
2026	$4.50	$8.00	$4.50	$8.00	-$22.50
2027	$4.64	$8.24	$9.14	$16.24	-$14.26
2028	$4.77	$8.49	$13.91	$24.73	-$5.77
2029	$4.92	$8.74	$18.83	$33.47	$2.97
2030	$5.06	$9.00	$23.89	$42.47	$11.97
2031	$5.22	$9.27	$29.11	$51.75	$21.25
2032	$5.37	$9.55	$34.48	$61.30	$30.80

Here is better, we break even about a year earlier in 2029.

Things to remember:
1. We would be floating interest on exit fees and debt we are already carrying.

-That would shift the 17m for exit fees to 22m based on a 4.5% interest rate over 6 years (The exact term of time we would have to pay off the exit fee as it incurs interest). YES this could go down if we are successful in negotiation.

-In addition the 25m or so that we are floating in debt would grow by 6m to 7.5m (if we account the time it would take to reach a break even point)

2. These are projected "estimates" that do not include ramp up schedules to payments that are common in media deals. I have no way to calculate that, so I used raw "median" values. That would take our break even times and move them to the right to about 2031-2032 in both scenarios.

3. This assumes that the pac deal runs to 2032 and is not more short term. I used that timeline because it is projected that the next round of power realignment could happen in 2031-2032 if not sooner.

 

[bcvegaspt2]

When does the Pac deal need to be completed in order for them to be a viable conference after this upcoming year? Is there a deadline for any of this?

 

[RebelinWA]

When does the Pac deal need to be completed in order for them to be a viable conference after this upcoming year? Is there a deadline for any of this?

In terms of when they need a media deal beyond next year for 2026, the sooner the better. But there is no pressing need at the moment beyond it being a staging point of negotiating in acquiring another school.

In terms of what they need to be considered a conference, they need that last football member to be there by June of 2026.

 

[Meister_Rebel]

Lets play around with a large language model that I have been developing to figure out what is the total cost of UNLV to leave the mountain west. Everything represented in the graph is coming from my program.

I am including a 3% inflation rate into these models as a baseline. If I knew what the actual inflation rate would be, I would be a wizard and I wouldn't be wasting my time on this scenario. I would have already just given UNLV the money to exit.

So lets start with our baseline cost to leave.

Component	Amount (in Millions USD)
Exit Fee	$17.0
Poaching Distribution Loss (24.5%)	$12.0
Annual Loyalty Guarantee Loss (7 years * avg. $1.65M)	$11.55
Total Cost to Leave	$40.55M

From there lets do a projection assuming the mountain west is getting 4.5m per school, and the Pac is getting 8m.

Year	MWC Payout (Adj.)	Pac-12 Payout (Adj.)	MWC Cumulative	Pac-12 Cumulative	Net Gain/Loss vs MWC	Net Gain/Loss vs $40.55M Cost
2026	$4.50	$8.00	$4.50	$8.00	$3.50	- $32.55
2027	$4.64	$8.24	$9.14	$16.24	$7.10	- $24.31
2028	$4.77	$8.49	$13.91	$24.73	$10.82	- $15.82
2029	$4.92	$8.74	$18.83	$33.47	$14.64	- $7.08
2030	$5.06	$9.00	$23.89	$42.47	$18.58	$1.92
2031	$5.22	$9.27	$29.11	$51.75	$22.64	$11.20
2032	$5.37	$9.55	$34.48	$61.30	$26.82	$20.75

Break even point is around 2030 in this scenario, or just before projected conference realignment

Now lets assume we can negotiate exit fees down to 30.5m and run the projections again.

Year	MWC (Adj.)	Pac-12 (Adj.)	MWC Cumulative	Pac-12 Cumulative	Pac-12 Net Gain/Loss
2026	$4.50	$8.00	$4.50	$8.00	-$22.50
2027	$4.64	$8.24	$9.14	$16.24	-$14.26
2028	$4.77	$8.49	$13.91	$24.73	-$5.77
2029	$4.92	$8.74	$18.83	$33.47	$2.97
2030	$5.06	$9.00	$23.89	$42.47	$11.97
2031	$5.22	$9.27	$29.11	$51.75	$21.25
2032	$5.37	$9.55	$34.48	$61.30	$30.80

Here is better, we break even about a year earlier in 2029.

Things to remember:
1. We would be floating interest on exit fees and debt we are already carrying.

-That would shift the 17m for exit fees to 22m based on a 4.5% interest rate over 6 years (The exact term of time we would have to pay off the exit fee as it incurs interest). YES this could go down if we are successful in negotiation.

-In addition the 25m or so that we are floating in debt would grow by 6m to 7.5m (if we account the time it would take to reach a break even point)

2. These are projected "estimates" that do not include ramp up schedules to payments that are common in media deals. I have no way to calculate that, so I used raw "median" values. That would take our break even times and move them to the right to about 2031-2032 in both scenarios.

3. This assumes that the pac deal runs to 2032 and is not more short term. I used that timeline because it is projected that the next round of power realignment could happen in 2031-2032 if not sooner.

So, if we are betting on ourselves by staying in the MWC and then going into a P5 conference then we need to do it before 2030 or 2029 depending on the chart. After that we start losing money by being in the MWC. Does that sound right in saying that using your charts?

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

When does the Pac deal need to be completed in order for them to be a viable conference after this upcoming year? Is there a deadline for any of this?

July 2026..

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

So, if we are betting on ourselves by staying in the MWC and then going into a P5 conference then we need to do it before 2030 or 2029 depending on the chart. After that we start losing money by being in the MWC. Does that sound right in saying that using your charts?

The gist of it.

 

[LVRebel2000]

I know this guy is a PAC 12 mouthpiece, but Cofield did an interview with John Canzano, who doesn't think that the agreements that UNLV and AF signed (as well as the other schools), would hold up if schools really wanted to leave. He's hinting at the PAC and MW working through this mediation, while the PAC gets the final numbers for the media deal, and the UNLV could still be in the works, if they desire to join the PAC.

 

[Rebel1986]

So, if we are betting on ourselves by staying in the MWC and then going into a P5 conference then we need to do it before 2030 or 2029 depending on the chart. After that we start losing money by being in the MWC. Does that sound right in saying that using your charts?

A point that is also being ignored by everyone is if UNLV does really well in football, that will significantly increase their value, thus would also increase the value of the next MWC media contract. While moving to a major conference, which all MWC teams have that deal without penalty, is the main goal of UNLV, secondary is to make sure the MWC media deal is the best possible financially. One way to do that is to stay in the top 25 this year, beat BSU twice, get into the playoff, and preferably win the first game in the playoff! A big year could do wonders for the value of the MWC future contract. Anything else the basketball program can do would just be gravy for UNLV.

 

[RebelinWA]

So, if we are betting on ourselves by staying in the MWC and then going into a P5 conference then we need to do it before 2030 or 2029 depending on the chart. After that we start losing money by being in the MWC. Does that sound right in saying that using your charts?

Yessir! But that's also not taking in account debt and interest from that. I can try to factor that in when I get home.

 

[Bullmastiff 1]

A point that is also being ignored by everyone is if UNLV does really well in football, that will significantly increase their value, thus would also increase the value of the next MWC media contract. While moving to a major conference, which all MWC teams have that deal without penalty, is the main goal of UNLV, secondary is to make sure the MWC media deal is the best possible financially. One way to do that is to stay in the top 25 this year, beat BSU twice, get into the playoff, and preferably win the first game in the playoff! A big year could do wonders for the value of the MWC future contract. Anything else the basketball program can do would just be gravy for UNLV.

UNLV doing really well would increase UNLV's value as a free agent for a potential P4 invite but it wouldn't help the MWC media numbers all that much. Reason being If MWC is worth an AAV of 5 millon for 9 teams (ease of math) and lets assume UNLV was already carrying a heavy load and was valued at 8. Another great year that value for UNLV jumps to 10, the conference AAV would only increase a couple hundred thousand.

There are just way too many programs left in the MWC that don't have a lot of upside, shown the willingness to inves.

SJSU has the market but nobody cares. Like at all.

WYO's value is capped by a smallish market.

AFA is a niche program like Army and Navy without the appeal drawing power of anything close to the Army vs Navy game.

I think you're right UNLV is poised for a lot of good things but I don't see it helping the MWC much but at the very least it positions UNLV for potential P4 invite.

 

[RebelinWA]

UNLV doing really well would increase UNLV's value as a free agent for a potential P4 invite but it wouldn't help the MWC media numbers all that much. Reason being If MWC is worth an AAV of 5 millon for 9 teams (ease of math) and lets assume UNLV was already carrying a heavy load and was valued at 8. Another great year that value for UNLV jumps to 10, the conference AAV would only increase a couple hundred thousand.

There are just way too many programs left in the MWC that don't have a lot of upside, shown the willingness to inves.

SJSU has the market but nobody cares. Like at all.

WYO's value is capped by a smallish market.

AFA is a niche program like Army and Navy without the appeal drawing power of anything close to the Army vs Navy game.

I think you're right UNLV is poised for a lot of good things but I don't see it helping the MWC much but at the very least it positions UNLV for potential P4 invite.

Its a bit of mincing. I get both sides. Do we dominate our league as the clear dominate power while making less money, or do we make more money and fight it out with Boise every year?

If we miss swinging for a p4, does someone else from the Pac get that slot? In that case, the Pac reloading with UNLV might come with more guaranteed money.

Its all irrelevant if we can end up with a p4 invite. There is a lot of smoke to that, but we certainly have a very long way to go. Nothing is guaranteed.