Early Wednesday, the MAC signed a new eight-year contract with ESPN, which calls for at least 25 MAC sporting events, between football and men’s and women’s basketball, to be broadcasted annually on the ESPN family of networks. The contract extends through 2016-2017.

Chris Dertz: So Mike, the MAC signed a new contract with ESPN that basically says the network will be broadcasting a boatload of the conference’s games, and I couldn’t be more excited. There’s really no better presentation than what ESPN can provide, and to be able to see that presentation given to games in my own school’s conference on a consistent basis is, without a doubt, the best news I received yesterday.

Mike Buda: Well, I can’t say the same because I found a penny on my way to class. This new contract will be doing the same for the MAC as it has done the past couple of years: nothing. Unless we have good teams, such as Ball State, playing, the MAC will not benefit from this “showcase.” Yes, the MAC will have games on ESPN, but all of the games will probably end up on ESPN2 and who watches that?

CD: I do. Let’s face it, anybody who’s going to be watching the MAC in the first place is going to be at least a more-than-casual sports fan, so they probably wouldn’t mind the extreme amount of effort it takes to flip one channel over. ESPN2’s purpose has always been to provide an alternative platform for games. Besides, there are good teams in the MAC, and you’ve got a level of parity that many other conferences don’t. Any increase in airtime is nothing but a good thing.

MB: But isn’t the point of putting MAC games on ESPN to get more than just the more-than-casual sports fan? The MAC wants new viewers and new fans, but it won’t get what it wants if the same people are watching. And you are right by saying the MAC has good teams, but we don’t have great teams. In basketball, the MAC has another thing that other conferences don’t have: no top 25 teams. The regular fan will watch, but you need a lot more than that to make this a positive.

CD: I disagree completely. The fact that the MAC signed on the dotted line alone is enough to make this a positive. It’s simple – getting these “new fans” is made an impossibility if you don’t get your games on TV. This is just the initial step for the MAC, and any steps in this direction are positive. Besides, a lack of top 25 teams doesn’t prevent MAC action from being exciting. The NIU women’s basketball team is tied for first in their division, and is hosting a Bowling Green team Saturday that is on the cusp of a top 25 ranking. How can they watch if the teams aren’t on TV?

MB: The deal is supposed to draw more fans to the TV, but that’s just not going to happen. The excitement factor is crucial, but I never hear anyone saying, “Hey, did you see that Buffalo-Western Michigan game last night?” The bottom line is they need to draw the ordinary sports fan, and I don’t see that happening anytime soon with any MAC game.

CD: I don’t think either of us are in any position to comment on either side’s motivation behind the deal. I also don’t think I’ll be able to convince you that the reason any conference makes a deal like this is simple – they want their games on TV. You never know what can happen. Utah beat Alabama, for Pete’s sake, and there’s no reason to call this contract anything other than a great deal for the MAC.