(05-08-2013 09:16 PM)JollyRoger13 Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:57 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:47 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 08:28 PM)CyberBull Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:58 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  This bowl situation is probably the last chance for Aresco to change my opinion of him. If we keep at least 1 of the 3 good eastern bowls or create something new that's comparable then he did a good job. If we lose all 3, create no bowl, and our best game is the Liberty or worse then it's another in his long list of failures.

I've been critical of folks dumping on aresco based on the TV deal but I think your comments are fair. He needs to convince these bowl games that there is value in having AAC teams in their games. Especially the Orlando based bowl where USF and UCF can help sell tix and the game is within easy driving distance from ECU. It's an excellent regional game at a terrific destination city that we NEED to keep in the fold. I'd love to see the Beef OBrady Bowl move to,RJS...but not likely going to happen.

Not sure about the Pinstripe bowl as we are not a northeast based conference anymore.

If 12 hours is easy driving distance then sure

I thought ECU fans are supposed to road warriors....

I can tell you that I would be there for sure, along with a bunch of people from the Hampton Roads area. We drove to Memphis in a convoy and we would certainly drive to sunny FL (with more fans most likely).

Agreed. 12 hrs isn't that bad for a GOOD bowl in a GOOD location. Take a look at a map of bowl tie ins. The ones for the MWC and Pac12 are pretty bad geography wise. Russell bowl would be great.

(05-08-2013 10:20 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 09:15 PM)bearcatlawjd Wrote:  Anybody have an audio like or file.

Here ya go:

https://soundcloud.com/espndub/american-...mmissioner

Thanks for posting the link. Finally, a little real information on what we are doing in the bowl scramble. A couple of things that I found interesting--

Aresco indicated he wants 6, 7 or 8 bowl tie-ins. That's way more than I expected.

Judging by Arescos tone, I get the impression that a conference owned bowl is pretty likely.

Likewise, Arescos says he is "hoping" to hold onto the Russell and Pinstripe--so while it's clear he thinks we have a real shot, its also clear he's hedging a bit.

I like that he has met with ESPN. They own a bunch of bowls including the Mieneke Car Care Bowl in Houston. I could see that meeting paying off with a a couple of slots in ESPN bowls as well as landing a partner for a potential AAC owned champions bowl.

Russell Athletic Bowl is as good as gone.

#1 They really hate the prospect of getting stuck with UCF or USF. This doesn't sell hotel or help out their events surrounding the bowl. They also believe that they have built a local fan base for the bowl. Casual fans who live in the area, that just love the bowl no matter the opponent. Now if you bring in a local team, your double dipping in the same market.

#2 Lots of bad blood with UCFAA. For about 10 years there has been a really bad feud. They were killing us with the rental agreement to use the Citrus Bowl as our home field. We decided to build our own stadium. When we went to get city funds, they fought us. After Brighthouse opened, a new bowl organization began in Orlando called the Cure Bowl. The Cure Bowl was trying to create a bowl and have UCF host the game. Florida Citrus Sports (owns both Russell and Chapital One) made sure the bowl never got off the ground. After that, Capital One bowl had that turf incident. They went to the city and asked for money for renovations (which were way overdue). UCF then fought their proposal, saying that if anything should be getting an upgrade it should be Brighthouse.

(05-09-2013 01:49 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I like that he has met with ESPN. They own a bunch of bowls including the Mieneke Car Care Bowl in Houston. I could see that meeting paying off with a a couple of slots in ESPN bowls as well as landing a partner for a potential AAC owned champions bowl.

IMO, the bottom line is that as far as stable tie-ins are concerned, we are going to get the scraps left over after the SEC, ACC, B1G, and B12 sort their bowls out.

Where Aresco can, and must, make a difference is in securing back-up tie-ins for situations where one of the P5 can't fill their obligations. BondsJon has done a good job of explaining this.

(05-09-2013 07:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 01:49 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I like that he has met with ESPN. They own a bunch of bowls including the Mieneke Car Care Bowl in Houston. I could see that meeting paying off with a a couple of slots in ESPN bowls as well as landing a partner for a potential AAC owned champions bowl.

IMO, the bottom line is that as far as stable tie-ins are concerned, we are going to get the scraps left over after the SEC, ACC, B1G, and B12 sort their bowls out.

Where Aresco can, and must, make a difference is in securing back-up tie-ins for situations where one of the P5 can't fill their obligations. BondsJon has done a good job of explaining this.

This league does need 1 good, stable tie in for the champ. It needs to be something better than the Liberty. The reward for winning this league but missing the GO5 bowl needs to be better than the Liberty (and I don't mean anything personal to the Liberty).

(05-09-2013 07:28 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 07:09 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 01:49 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I like that he has met with ESPN. They own a bunch of bowls including the Mieneke Car Care Bowl in Houston. I could see that meeting paying off with a a couple of slots in ESPN bowls as well as landing a partner for a potential AAC owned champions bowl.

IMO, the bottom line is that as far as stable tie-ins are concerned, we are going to get the scraps left over after the SEC, ACC, B1G, and B12 sort their bowls out.

Where Aresco can, and must, make a difference is in securing back-up tie-ins for situations where one of the P5 can't fill their obligations. BondsJon has done a good job of explaining this.

This league does need 1 good, stable tie in for the champ. It needs to be something better than the Liberty. The reward for winning this league but missing the GO5 bowl needs to be better than the Liberty (and I don't mean anything personal to the Liberty).

Agreed, but the Liberty pays out about $1.6 million a year. That's less than the $2.35 million payout of the Russell, but we're not keeping the Russell. So in all likelihood, we are looking at a payout of between $1.5m and $1.9m for our champ. So i bet the Liberty is in the range of "as good as we can get", and even that will depend on whether the SEC and Big 12 come to terms on it.

What are the other bowls in this payout range?

Pinstripe: Gone
Belk: Likely gone
Meineke: Would much rather keep B12/B1G
Music City: ACC vs SEC
Sun: Doesn't want us

All those bowls prefer P5 vs P5. One thing we can always do is set up our own bowl, but that is very risky. IMO it is highly unlikely we can find a sponsor willing to guarantee us the $2 million payout it would take to make that worthwhile.

I'm not saying Aresco shouldn't be busting his nuts trying to get secure tie-in for our champ with all of these bowls, he should. I just think the odds of success are bleak.

I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new. This is the last chance for Aresco to actually prove he's worth the money he's getting paid. So far everything has ended up so far below what was expected that he really should have been fired months ago. He has to prove his worth somewhere.

(05-09-2013 07:56 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new. This is the last chance for Aresco to actually prove he's worth the money he's getting paid. So far everything has ended up so far below what was expected that he really should have been fired months ago. He has to prove his worth somewhere.

The is no magic wand for what you want to happen. Aresco is only as powerful as the conference value allows. He can't go to a bowl, or a tv network and demand or negotiate something that is not there. The league has a value, that value is determined by what others are willing to pay for it. No salesman can turn water into wine. When all is said and done, I am willing to bet that Aresco did everything humanly possible for this league. He is universally liked by all the people that matter in the tv and college sports world. This matters a great deal in the world of negotiations.
What do you want him to do? How can he squeeze fruit from a stone?

With the ACC and Big Ten jumping to 14 teams....with SEC now at 14 teams...their bowl slots will continue to grow (heck, SEC had 10 bowl agreements for just 12 teams....didn't always fill them of course).

With SOS maybe being a factor in the new playoff...some teams might start to play tougher non-conf schedules...which might knock out 1 or 2 conf teams from bowl bids by years end.

However, I think there is a larger group of schools that know that do NOT have a legitimate chance at the national championship Final Four...and will continue to play "easy" non-conf games (especially when they start to play 9 conf games), all so that they can at least go bowling each year (keep boosters happy, help coaches reach easily attainable goals/bonuses, etc...).

I could see the AAC being the back-up choice for several SEC and ACC bowls in the Southeast and/or Texas.

(05-08-2013 07:49 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Sure the "exposure" might be good, but is it exposure that anyone really wants?

ALL exposure is valuable. I don't give a hoot what day of the week as long as the production is first class.

(05-09-2013 07:56 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new.

Yet another reason why it would make sense to see if we can set something up where our champ will play the MWC champ every year. Our leagues are on the same level. We are who we are and have to accept reality.

I think that playing the MWC champ would be a good get for our runner up in years that our champ makes it to the play off or access bowl and think the same is true for their runner up as well in years that their champ makes it to the play off or access bowl.

I hope we are not being closed minded about this possibility. Somewhere in TX would be great for such a bowl.

(05-09-2013 08:09 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 07:56 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new. This is the last chance for Aresco to actually prove he's worth the money he's getting paid. So far everything has ended up so far below what was expected that he really should have been fired months ago. He has to prove his worth somewhere.

The is no magic wand for what you want to happen. Aresco is only as powerful as the conference value allows. He can't go to a bowl, or a tv network and demand or negotiate something that is not there. The league has a value, that value is determined by what others are willing to pay for it. No salesman can turn water into wine. When all is said and done, I am willing to bet that Aresco did everything humanly possible for this league. He is universally liked by all the people that matter in the tv and college sports world. This matters a great deal in the world of negotiations.
What do you want him to do? How can he squeeze fruit from a stone?

I'd like him to pull something off that doesn't end up being about twice as bad as the worst media prediction out there. I don't care if he's the most popular guy on earth so far he's accomplished nothing positive. This is the last chance. Once this bowl lineup is settled there's no more negotiations. If our bowl lineup in the future is not better than C-USA's recent bowl lineup then he's a complete failure on all levels and should be fired.

(05-09-2013 08:09 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 07:56 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new. This is the last chance for Aresco to actually prove he's worth the money he's getting paid. So far everything has ended up so far below what was expected that he really should have been fired months ago. He has to prove his worth somewhere.

The is no magic wand for what you want to happen. Aresco is only as powerful as the conference value allows. He can't go to a bowl, or a tv network and demand or negotiate something that is not there. The league has a value, that value is determined by what others are willing to pay for it. No salesman can turn water into wine. When all is said and done, I am willing to bet that Aresco did everything humanly possible for this league. He is universally liked by all the people that matter in the tv and college sports world. This matters a great deal in the world of negotiations.
What do you want him to do? How can he squeeze fruit from a stone?

Glad somebody understands this. The bowls deal with who they want. The highest paying bowls get the top tier conferences and the top tier confrerences just grew by 2 members each + ND getting deals via ACC. This isn't a "reward" like a lot of people make it out to be. Bowls are a FOR PROFIT venture. The AAC will get the best we can get but if they aren't "acceptable" at face value to uninformed fans that doesn't mean the conference leaders didn't try. It's just the reality of college football right now.

We literally overlap 4 power conferences (SEC, B10, ACC & B12) and don't have anywhere close to the market penetration of any of them. I honestly don't know what some of the folks on this board expect. Our tie-in's will be right where we are now, about even with MWC, above CUSA/MAC/SBC and below the P5.

(05-09-2013 08:09 AM)KnightLight Wrote:  I could see the AAC being the back-up choice for several SEC and ACC bowls in the Southeast and/or Texas.

In most cases, the AAC's bowl attractiveness lies in (1) near proximity to many of our schools and (2) the large TV markets of the conference, which help ratings.

(05-09-2013 08:13 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(05-08-2013 07:49 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Sure the "exposure" might be good, but is it exposure that anyone really wants?

ALL exposure is valuable. I don't give a hoot what day of the week as long as the production is first class.

How many of ESPN's mid week games are first class? A lot of them are just the C and D announce crews that use the game as a backdrop to talk about the big games coming up on the weekend.

(05-09-2013 08:18 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 08:09 AM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 07:56 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new. This is the last chance for Aresco to actually prove he's worth the money he's getting paid. So far everything has ended up so far below what was expected that he really should have been fired months ago. He has to prove his worth somewhere.

The is no magic wand for what you want to happen. Aresco is only as powerful as the conference value allows. He can't go to a bowl, or a tv network and demand or negotiate something that is not there. The league has a value, that value is determined by what others are willing to pay for it. No salesman can turn water into wine. When all is said and done, I am willing to bet that Aresco did everything humanly possible for this league. He is universally liked by all the people that matter in the tv and college sports world. This matters a great deal in the world of negotiations.
What do you want him to do? How can he squeeze fruit from a stone?

Glad somebody understands this. The bowls deal with who they want. The highest paying bowls get the top tier conferences and the top tier confrerences just grew by 2 members each + ND getting deals via ACC. This isn't a "reward" like a lot of people make it out to be. Bowls are a FOR PROFIT venture. The AAC will get the best we can get but if they aren't "acceptable" at face value to uninformed fans that doesn't mean the conference leaders didn't try. It's just the reality of college football right now.

We literally overlap 4 power conferences (SEC, B10, ACC & B12) and don't have anywhere close to the market penetration of any of them. I honestly don't know what some of the folks on this board expect. Our tie-in's will be right where we are now, about even with MWC, above CUSA/MAC/SBC and below the P5.

Exactly, I expect one or two solid games while the rest will be just be filler games. Heck most bowl games are just exhibition games that have no relationship to the national championship. Under the new system only the playoff games and the other major playoff rotation bowls will are going to be considered major games.

(05-09-2013 07:56 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new. This is the last chance for Aresco to actually prove he's worth the money he's getting paid. So far everything has ended up so far below what was expected that he really should have been fired months ago. He has to prove his worth somewhere.

IMO, the results since he was hired already prove he is worth far less than what he's been paid, and a better-than-expected bowl lineup will only partially mitigate that. It's hard to see how a stump of wood could have produced results any worse.

I think the fundamental problem with Aresco's hiring was that we hired a guy with expertise in the ways of media negotiations. You do that when your product quality is not subject to depreciation. But ours was, and from two sources: Defections (which Aresco could do little about) and our status in the new P5/G5 hierarchy. So what we needed late last summer was someone with skills in negotiating with other conferences and bowls so as to firm up our status in the emerging playoff system. What we needed was not just an access-bowl slot for the Group of 5, we needed it to (a) pay out as well as an access-bowl bid for P5 conferences, something like $40-$50 million, and (b) the conference that gets that bid gets to keep the great bulk of the money, and © keep Boise in the fold so as to make it overwhelmingly likely that the Big East would get that bid.

IMO, all three were eminently achievable, as they didn't seriously threaten the money earned by the P5. Aresco was unable to achieve any of them. And as a result, as it became clear that the new Big East would not effectively retain a kind of quasi-AQ status but really was being relegated to the ranks of the G5, the value of the AAC in the minds of media companies took a big plunge, hence our media contract is worth peanuts.

(05-09-2013 08:16 AM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(05-09-2013 07:56 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I understand the realities aren't good, but this leagues top bowl had to be at least as good as the top MWC tie in. Whether that's by keeping one of the bowls we have, signing something new, or creating something new.

Yet another reason why it would make sense to see if we can set something up where our champ will play the MWC champ every year. Our leagues are on the same level. We are who we are and have to accept reality.

I think that playing the MWC champ would be a good get for our runner up in years that our champ makes it to the play off or access bowl and think the same is true for their runner up as well in years that their champ makes it to the play off or access bowl.

I hope we are not being closed minded about this possibility. Somewhere in TX would be great for such a bowl.

Personally, I think playing the Mountain West champ is a huge mistake. First, most years either the MW or the AAC champ will win the Non-AQ BCS slot. That means the game will almost always never be champ vs champ. Worse yet, the runner up will always be coming off a CCG loss, meaning they will virtually never be ranked. So most of the time we will be playing an unranked non-AQ also ran. That's hardly anything for our conference champ players or fan base to look forward to. Besides, we play an entire conference schedule of non-AQs.

The second problem is the MW isn't interested. Their #1 bowl is the Las Vegas Bowl vs the Pac12 #5. They are currently working to upgrade relationship and enhance it with a OOC/Bowl agreement with the Pac12. If we want to truly have the best bowl line up of the gang of 5 (a reasonably attainable goal for Aresco), then we need a champions game vs a power conference #5 or better and we need to have more lower bowl games vs power conferences than any other gang of 5 conferences. By the way, this is important as it will be a major recruiting tool.

This line of thought leads me to the same destination each time I consider it. The two best options for a good champions bowl are the Sun Bowl or a bowl we start ourselves. The Sun Bowl is a relatively remote location, yet we have 5 schools within driving distance of the Bowl. The intersting thing about the Sun is that it has strong enough local support that the TV ratings are actually a bigger issue for the bowl than selling tickets. Here's where our TV contract can help. We can offer the Sun Bowl our champ. A champ, that due to the new ESPN media deal, will likely have been on NATIONAL tv 8-10 times (including a CCG win on that was likely on ABC). That will be a very well known team to America and a nice tv draw. The Sun offers a nice pay out and the #4 Pac12 pick.

The other option is to create a game with a Sun/Russell level payout. Games with that level of payout are attractive to power conferences. Because they can easily land power conferences--bowls with this level payout are not typically interested in us. However, if we own the game, we are guranteed a slot. Then it's just a matter of finding the highest P5 opponent possible. Keep in mind, since we are paying ourselves here, it doesn't matter what our payout is, the only real cost is what we pay our opponent. To start the bowl will require some money from the realignment fund, a sponsor (Fed Ex?) and a media partner (ESPN). Bowls make money, so after the start up cost, the bowl should actually make money for the conference going forward--so that profit is actually our "payout". While the Sun Bowl option is easier to accomplish--I think creating our own bowl is the best long term option. Our own bowl cannot be taken away from us and we can build the bowl up over time to pay a higher and higher payout. The biggest issue I see with this option is where to have it. For now, we need a centrally located fun warm weather destination with a modern facility that can hold about 50k. By the way, this option is right down Arescos wheelhouse.

I have wondered what Aresco's future might be. He has weathered the storm, but will he step aside once it is all clear? Shed that last of any potential negativity from this tumultuous era? Terry Holland has some time on his hands now and there are some in Greenville who do not believe he's done with College athletics just yet. Commissioner Holland anyone?

(05-09-2013 09:19 AM)FrancisDrake Wrote:  I have wondered what Aresco's future might be. He has weathered the storm, but will he step aside once it is all clear? Shed that last of any potential negativity from this tumultuous era? Terry Holland has some time on his hands now and there are some in Greenville who do not believe he's done with College athletics just yet. Commissioner Holland anyone?

Hes been working here for 6 months. I think Aresco is in it for the long haul or he would have been gone by now.