ADVERTISEMENT

Death of the MTE?

I think under this proposal - the MTE still exists as too much money involved in some of these events - like Maui and other big names, but it will definitely eliminate the majority of them for smaller and mid-major teams. This will put pressure on conferences to align with other conferences for annual matchups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
How can the Maui Invitational in Lahaina Civic Center that seats 2,400 plus all of the associated travel expenses with getting to Hawaii be more lucrative than a home game or marquee neutral site game in a big-time arena in a major city that could draw 10,000+?

About the only reason these MTEs exist is because they allow you to play more games.
 
How can the Maui Invitational in Lahaina Civic Center that seats 2,400 plus all of the associated travel expenses with getting to Hawaii be more lucrative than a home game or marquee neutral site game in a big-time arena in a major city that could draw 10,000+?

About the only reason these MTEs exist is because they allow you to play more games.

 
  • Like
Reactions: SFspidur
I was thinking more lucrative for the location, not the school. Think Maui invitational - its tourism dollars for them and the city that holds the event. 8 teams - each bringing about 20-30 players and staff, depending on the team and school. Then - because this is such an event - you have alumni and families attending, lets say 50 people per school decide to go. So right there alone - you have an estimated 500 people coming to stay, and half of them staying on athletic budget - which means no expense spared on hotels, meals, activities, etc.

Plus - from a coaching and team perspective, an argument could be made in the transfer portal era - these types of intensive trips, play 2-3 games in 3-4 days, away from home, staying and travelling as a team - is vital to help a team full of transfers bond together and come together early in the season.
 
To pull out the relevant bit:

There is a catch to the glamour and prestige of a Maui invite: Schools lose a lot of money for the opportunity to play on a huge stage in a small gym. Sources that played both in this year's tournament and have played in previous versions all said the price is easily north of $400,000, with some schools putting the cost well above $450,000 when taking charter flights into account.

"When you compare it to three games elsewhere with guarantees or [home game revenue], when you put it in that context, the disparity is enormous," one source said.

The bill also includes hotel rooms, meals, on-site events and ticket packages the athletic departments have to sell to fans, which schools pay for in advance. Universities don't recoup that money. Nobody that plays in the Maui Invitational winds up coming close to breaking even.
In a day when they're having to share millions of dollars of revenue with the athletes, what is the benefit for schools to continue losing money on this? Play somewhere closer to home where you can line your pockets with cash.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: MDspider8
Meanwhile, after expanding to 18 teams next season, the Players Era event is looking to grow to 32 teams in 2026. St. Joe's managed to get into the field for next year, but otherwise it's all big boys...this is what will happen when MTEs cease to be a thing.

No more restrictions on conference representation or frequency of participation in any given event, and no scheduling bonuses. Just big boys getting together to play each other in major arenas for NIL payouts. Most A-10-level schools will be lucky to get a nibble once in a blue moon.

 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT