(02-09-2015 07:16 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  UC winning the AAC or not has zero to do with the fact we have a commissioner that is way overpaid for what he has done. Don't get me wrong, he has probably done the best he can, but for the money, it's a waste. I would can him, hire some young dude who we could pay 1/2 the amount to. The end results wouldn't be much different, if any different at all. We are a G5 conference, we need a G5 commissioner with a G5 salary. Welcome to the truth.

Why do you care what Mike Aresco is being paid? It doesn't come out of your pocket. Your basic premise would work for the SEC as well. Some "young dude" could be paid 1/5th the salary there and get the same results.
"G5" is a football term, and a relatively new one. Who knows what term will around 2 years from now. We're in an upper echelon basketball conference. The NBE basketball contract shows that not all hoops conferences are created equal. The Natty UConn won last year under the AAC banner shows that. To equate the AAC as a run-of-the-mill "G5" conference, shows a remarkable lack of understanding of our situation.
The AAC is dependent on the relationships that Aresco is making/has made. If you really think that some "young dude" could walk in with an empty rolodex and start making deals, then you are showing your rear end. Nevermind forging a conference direction in press appearances and quikie interviews (like the one the OP posted).

The AAC will be fine. I'm not just saying that; I believe it.

But we have to improve the bottom half in FB and BB. We must win enough OOC games in September to give us credibility.

(02-09-2015 11:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC will be fine. I'm not just saying that; I believe it.

But we have to improve the bottom half in FB and BB. We must win enough OOC games in September to give us credibility.

I agree with every word stated above.

Quote:“We just didn’t play the Power 5 schools, we played the best of them,” said Aresco.

This strategy needs to be reevaluated.

(02-10-2015 09:36 AM)NothingButKnight Wrote:  This strategy needs to be reevaluated.

Seeing as how Marshall actually got ranked before their loss against WKU it's hard to argue that point.

I still like our programs competing against other top programs though. It's a difficult balance because of the Marshall-approach other conferences employ.

(02-09-2015 11:51 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 07:16 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  UC winning the AAC or not has zero to do with the fact we have a commissioner that is way overpaid for what he has done. Don't get me wrong, he has probably done the best he can, but for the money, it's a waste. I would can him, hire some young dude who we could pay 1/2 the amount to. The end results wouldn't be much different, if any different at all. We are a G5 conference, we need a G5 commissioner with a G5 salary. Welcome to the truth.

Why do you care what Mike Aresco is being paid? It doesn't come out of your pocket. Your basic premise would work for the SEC as well. Some "young dude" could be paid 1/5th the salary there and get the same results.
"G5" is a football term, and a relatively new one. Who knows what term will around 2 years from now. We're in an upper echelon basketball conference. The NBE basketball contract shows that not all hoops conferences are created equal. The Natty UConn won last year under the AAC banner shows that. To equate the AAC as a run-of-the-mill "G5" conference, shows a remarkable lack of understanding of our situation.
The AAC is dependent on the relationships that Aresco is making/has made. If you really think that some "young dude" could walk in with an empty rolodex and start making deals, then you are showing your rear end. Nevermind forging a conference direction in press appearances and quikie interviews (like the one the OP posted).

^^^^^^^^^^^^

(02-10-2015 10:04 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 09:36 AM)NothingButKnight Wrote:  This strategy needs to be reevaluated.

Seeing as how Marshall actually got ranked before their loss against WKU it's hard to argue that point.

I still like our programs competing against other top programs though. It's a difficult balance because of the Marshall-approach other conferences employ.

There's a huge difference between Marshall's OOC philosophy and SMU's. Somewhere in the middle is the answer. I'd love for UCF to have a schedule with one decent P5 team, two of the weaker ones (I'd love to play Kansas and Iowa St OOC one year), and a FBS opponent from the G5.

(02-09-2015 05:03 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:51 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:34 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:24 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:23 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  I mean 2019/2020 isn't that short. Wish I knew exactly what can be on the table during the "look in". That # (2.1mm) is just so disastrous as we try to stay somewhat close to the P5's and separate ourselves from the G5's. No business can compete against someone making 10X the revenue.

You're forgetting that the value of the short term TV deal is bolstered by the breakup fees with the C7.

Right. So basically UConn, Cinci and USF get an d extra $3.3mm/year ($20mm/6 six years) and the rest get about 0.75mm ($40mm/9 teams/6 years). That helps. Have to keep up on the NCAA credits.

Considering that he was negotiating from a position of just having lost the C7 and the Western Wing, I think he did a good job of positioning the conference. Last years performance was a huge boost to the new brand. With the exposure he negotiated, that brand is associated with the reigning national champions. While its too bad that UConn is in the middle of a reloading year, I've been very pleased with the AAC games regularly shown on TV.

It's all a process.

That's an optimal word there... 'positioning'. That's really all Aresco could do with a taped-together no-name conference. And he put us in a hell of a good position.

Many on here bemoan our low TV $$$, but only a magician could have achieved serious $$ with such a product to offer. I almost wish I could fast-forward a decade to see how the American fares... but I'll just have to get there the long way.

How did he "DO" anything? ESPN had the right to match and did, I really don't get it. The dollar value is simply miserable compared to the P5s. Again, anyone could have come away with the same deal, IMO.

(02-09-2015 11:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC will be fine. I'm not just saying that; I believe it.

But we have to improve the bottom half in FB and BB. We must win enough OOC games in September to give us credibility.

AMEN!

The top half played well, but the bottom half needs a lot of improvement. We can't have 2-4 teams in the "ESPN Bottom 10" week after week - that gives a bad reputation to the entire conference.

I think you'll see more OOC wins next season - we're headed in the right direction.

(02-09-2015 11:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  The AAC will be fine. I'm not just saying that; I believe it.

But we have to improve the bottom half in FB and BB. We must win enough OOC games in September to give us credibility.

My hope is that UConn's women's basketball will help other schools rise to their level like Tennessee has inspired SEC schools.

We can say similar statements about men's basketball. We seems to have a larger pool of schools that can compete nationally.

College football in our conference is much more fluid. There is no doubt that most schools will rise and fall. I don't expect a bottom dweller to remain there over the lifetime of the conference.

(02-10-2015 11:50 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 05:03 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:51 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:34 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:24 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  You're forgetting that the value of the short term TV deal is bolstered by the breakup fees with the C7.

Right. So basically UConn, Cinci and USF get an d extra $3.3mm/year ($20mm/6 six years) and the rest get about 0.75mm ($40mm/9 teams/6 years). That helps. Have to keep up on the NCAA credits.

Considering that he was negotiating from a position of just having lost the C7 and the Western Wing, I think he did a good job of positioning the conference. Last years performance was a huge boost to the new brand. With the exposure he negotiated, that brand is associated with the reigning national champions. While its too bad that UConn is in the middle of a reloading year, I've been very pleased with the AAC games regularly shown on TV.

It's all a process.

That's an optimal word there... 'positioning'. That's really all Aresco could do with a taped-together no-name conference. And he put us in a hell of a good position.

Many on here bemoan our low TV $$$, but only a magician could have achieved serious $$ with such a product to offer. I almost wish I could fast-forward a decade to see how the American fares... but I'll just have to get there the long way.

How did he "DO" anything? ESPN had the right to match and did, I really don't get it. The dollar value is simply miserable compared to the P5s. Again, anyone could have come away with the same deal, IMO.

Aresco almost single handedly secured the G5 access bowl slot. That's huge. ESPN matched but Aresco shopped the product around to get the NBC offer. There were certainly negotions. I'm no lawyer but I doubt the NBC/ESPN could be a 1:1 conversion, ESPN has more networks. The idea that the conference is on autopilot, as some seem to be suggesting, is ridiculous.

But lets talk money. If you honestly believe that a no-name brand new conference wtih primarily cUSA schools should have got near P5 TV $$$ with someone else at the helm... you are free to think that. Aresco took a SHORT deal with BIG exposure, with the full intent of building up the brand and re-negotiating in a few years. It was a best-available strategy given the hand we were dealt.

(02-10-2015 12:34 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 11:50 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 05:03 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:51 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:34 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Right. So basically UConn, Cinci and USF get an d extra $3.3mm/year ($20mm/6 six years) and the rest get about 0.75mm ($40mm/9 teams/6 years). That helps. Have to keep up on the NCAA credits.

Considering that he was negotiating from a position of just having lost the C7 and the Western Wing, I think he did a good job of positioning the conference. Last years performance was a huge boost to the new brand. With the exposure he negotiated, that brand is associated with the reigning national champions. While its too bad that UConn is in the middle of a reloading year, I've been very pleased with the AAC games regularly shown on TV.

It's all a process.

That's an optimal word there... 'positioning'. That's really all Aresco could do with a taped-together no-name conference. And he put us in a hell of a good position.

Many on here bemoan our low TV $$$, but only a magician could have achieved serious $$ with such a product to offer. I almost wish I could fast-forward a decade to see how the American fares... but I'll just have to get there the long way.

How did he "DO" anything? ESPN had the right to match and did, I really don't get it. The dollar value is simply miserable compared to the P5s. Again, anyone could have come away with the same deal, IMO.

Aresco almost single handedly secured the G5 access bowl slot. That's huge. ESPN matched but Aresco shopped the product around to get the NBC offer. There were certainly negotions. I'm no lawyer but I doubt the NBC/ESPN could be a 1:1 conversion, ESPN has more networks. The idea that the conference is on autopilot, as some seem to be suggesting, is ridiculous.

But lets talk money. If you honestly believe that a no-name brand new conference wtih primarily cUSA schools should have got near P5 TV $$$ with someone else at the helm... you are free to think that. Aresco took a SHORT deal with BIG exposure, with the full intent of building up the brand and re-negotiating in a few years. It was a best-available strategy given the hand we were dealt.

Near P5, they make 10X's more!!! 10X!! UConn and Cinci plus all the investments of the best of the best CUSA schools. He had options and the fact of the matter is that ESPN is getting a massive bargain.

We have been around and around this, I just disagree that Aresco has accomplished anything. Certainly nothing that any other manager could have done. I don't know where this idea that Aresco single handily secured the G5 slot (link).

I appreciate his marketing efforts, believe he is overpaid and has accomplished nothing. Certainly nothing that any somewhat competent person could accomplish. Again, our entire conference payout is close to what each individual P5 earns, that's messed up.

(02-10-2015 12:44 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:34 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 11:50 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 05:03 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 04:51 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  Considering that he was negotiating from a position of just having lost the C7 and the Western Wing, I think he did a good job of positioning the conference. Last years performance was a huge boost to the new brand. With the exposure he negotiated, that brand is associated with the reigning national champions. While its too bad that UConn is in the middle of a reloading year, I've been very pleased with the AAC games regularly shown on TV.

It's all a process.

That's an optimal word there... 'positioning'. That's really all Aresco could do with a taped-together no-name conference. And he put us in a hell of a good position.

Many on here bemoan our low TV $$$, but only a magician could have achieved serious $$ with such a product to offer. I almost wish I could fast-forward a decade to see how the American fares... but I'll just have to get there the long way.

How did he "DO" anything? ESPN had the right to match and did, I really don't get it. The dollar value is simply miserable compared to the P5s. Again, anyone could have come away with the same deal, IMO.

Aresco almost single handedly secured the G5 access bowl slot. That's huge. ESPN matched but Aresco shopped the product around to get the NBC offer. There were certainly negotions. I'm no lawyer but I doubt the NBC/ESPN could be a 1:1 conversion, ESPN has more networks. The idea that the conference is on autopilot, as some seem to be suggesting, is ridiculous.

But lets talk money. If you honestly believe that a no-name brand new conference wtih primarily cUSA schools should have got near P5 TV $$$ with someone else at the helm... you are free to think that. Aresco took a SHORT deal with BIG exposure, with the full intent of building up the brand and re-negotiating in a few years. It was a best-available strategy given the hand we were dealt.

Near P5, they make 10X's more!!! 10X!! UConn and Cinci plus all the investments of the best of the best CUSA schools. He had options and the fact of the matter is that ESPN is getting a massive bargain.

We have been around and around this, I just disagree that Aresco has accomplished anything. Certainly nothing that any other manager could have done. I don't know where this idea that Aresco single handily secured the G5 slot (link).

I appreciate his marketing efforts, believe he is overpaid and has accomplished nothing. Certainly nothing that any somewhat competent person could accomplish. Again, our entire conference payout is close to what each individual P5 earns, that's messed up.

Around and around she goes, where she stops (will it ever stop) nobody knows.
I don't think anyone could have done a better job with a revamped Big East missing 90% of its old assets. No Big East Basketball powers except for UConn and the rebuilt but not restored Bearcats. This conference has the leftovers from the old Big East (Uconn, UC and USF). The best the old Big East were being offered was about $10million each and no increase in exposure. Pitt & Syracuse bolted, Louisville announced there intentions to go independent and West Virginia goes to the Big 12. The remaining BB schools say no to football and get $5million from Fox (with names like Villanova and Georgetown).
So with 3 leftovers from the old Big East (that had 16 schools) and the addition of the best of CUSA, the AAC is getting the kind of exposure (including my Bearcats) that was not seen by the old Big East. And yet the minority complaints about Aresco continue.
Around and around we go, where she stops....

Not to mention that Aresco's salary is approved by the presidents of the member schools. So if he is overpaid, there are 12 stupid/incompetent presidents out there.

(02-10-2015 01:00 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:44 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:34 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 11:50 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-09-2015 05:03 PM)Bull Wrote:  That's an optimal word there... 'positioning'. That's really all Aresco could do with a taped-together no-name conference. And he put us in a hell of a good position.

Many on here bemoan our low TV $$$, but only a magician could have achieved serious $$ with such a product to offer. I almost wish I could fast-forward a decade to see how the American fares... but I'll just have to get there the long way.

How did he "DO" anything? ESPN had the right to match and did, I really don't get it. The dollar value is simply miserable compared to the P5s. Again, anyone could have come away with the same deal, IMO.

Aresco almost single handedly secured the G5 access bowl slot. That's huge. ESPN matched but Aresco shopped the product around to get the NBC offer. There were certainly negotions. I'm no lawyer but I doubt the NBC/ESPN could be a 1:1 conversion, ESPN has more networks. The idea that the conference is on autopilot, as some seem to be suggesting, is ridiculous.

But lets talk money. If you honestly believe that a no-name brand new conference wtih primarily cUSA schools should have got near P5 TV $$$ with someone else at the helm... you are free to think that. Aresco took a SHORT deal with BIG exposure, with the full intent of building up the brand and re-negotiating in a few years. It was a best-available strategy given the hand we were dealt.

Near P5, they make 10X's more!!! 10X!! UConn and Cinci plus all the investments of the best of the best CUSA schools. He had options and the fact of the matter is that ESPN is getting a massive bargain.

We have been around and around this, I just disagree that Aresco has accomplished anything. Certainly nothing that any other manager could have done. I don't know where this idea that Aresco single handily secured the G5 slot (link).

I appreciate his marketing efforts, believe he is overpaid and has accomplished nothing. Certainly nothing that any somewhat competent person could accomplish. Again, our entire conference payout is close to what each individual P5 earns, that's messed up.

Around and around she goes, where she stops (will it ever stop) nobody knows.
I don't think anyone could have done a better job with a revamped Big East missing 90% of its old assets. No Big East Basketball powers except for UConn and the rebuilt but not restored Bearcats. This conference has the leftovers from the old Big East (Uconn, UC and USF). The best the old Big East were being offered was about $10million each and no increase in exposure. Pitt & Syracuse bolted, Louisville announced there intentions to go independent and West Virginia goes to the Big 12. The remaining BB schools say no to football and get $5million from Fox (with names like Villanova and Georgetown).
So with 3 leftovers from the old Big East (that had 16 schools) and the addition of the best of CUSA, the AAC is getting the kind of exposure (including my Bearcats) that was not seen by the old Big East. And yet the minority complaints about Aresco continue.
Around and around we go, where she stops....

Not to mention that Aresco's salary is approved by the presidents of the member schools. So if he is overpaid, there are 12 stupid/incompetent presidents out there.

You forgot to add that the BE gets $5mm for Bball only when we know FBall drives the bus. I just don't see how $2.1mm for FBall and Bball with these brands/markets is justified considering other contracts out there. But yes, I agree the Aresco argument is a merry go round at this point.

Yes, school admins are incompetent when it comes to salary, they have no idea how the real world works. Our former president came into this school with a top 30 USNEWS ranking and FBall/Bball programs on the rise. Now we suck at everything and he got a $1mm paid sabbatical to write a book and travel, all while he was making over $1mm a year serving on boards AT THE SAME TIME that he was president. No wonder the education bubble may burst.

(02-10-2015 01:38 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:00 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:44 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:34 PM)Bull Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 11:50 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  How did he "DO" anything? ESPN had the right to match and did, I really don't get it. The dollar value is simply miserable compared to the P5s. Again, anyone could have come away with the same deal, IMO.

Aresco almost single handedly secured the G5 access bowl slot. That's huge. ESPN matched but Aresco shopped the product around to get the NBC offer. There were certainly negotions. I'm no lawyer but I doubt the NBC/ESPN could be a 1:1 conversion, ESPN has more networks. The idea that the conference is on autopilot, as some seem to be suggesting, is ridiculous.

But lets talk money. If you honestly believe that a no-name brand new conference wtih primarily cUSA schools should have got near P5 TV $$$ with someone else at the helm... you are free to think that. Aresco took a SHORT deal with BIG exposure, with the full intent of building up the brand and re-negotiating in a few years. It was a best-available strategy given the hand we were dealt.

Near P5, they make 10X's more!!! 10X!! UConn and Cinci plus all the investments of the best of the best CUSA schools. He had options and the fact of the matter is that ESPN is getting a massive bargain.

We have been around and around this, I just disagree that Aresco has accomplished anything. Certainly nothing that any other manager could have done. I don't know where this idea that Aresco single handily secured the G5 slot (link).

I appreciate his marketing efforts, believe he is overpaid and has accomplished nothing. Certainly nothing that any somewhat competent person could accomplish. Again, our entire conference payout is close to what each individual P5 earns, that's messed up.

Around and around she goes, where she stops (will it ever stop) nobody knows.
I don't think anyone could have done a better job with a revamped Big East missing 90% of its old assets. No Big East Basketball powers except for UConn and the rebuilt but not restored Bearcats. This conference has the leftovers from the old Big East (Uconn, UC and USF). The best the old Big East were being offered was about $10million each and no increase in exposure. Pitt & Syracuse bolted, Louisville announced there intentions to go independent and West Virginia goes to the Big 12. The remaining BB schools say no to football and get $5million from Fox (with names like Villanova and Georgetown).
So with 3 leftovers from the old Big East (that had 16 schools) and the addition of the best of CUSA, the AAC is getting the kind of exposure (including my Bearcats) that was not seen by the old Big East. And yet the minority complaints about Aresco continue.
Around and around we go, where she stops....

Not to mention that Aresco's salary is approved by the presidents of the member schools. So if he is overpaid, there are 12 stupid/incompetent presidents out there.

You forgot to add that the BE gets $5mm for Bball only when we know FBall drives the bus. I just don't see how $2.1mm for FBall and Bball with these brands/markets is justified considering other contracts out there. But yes, I agree the Aresco argument is a merry go round at this point.

Yes, school admins are incompetent when it comes to salary, they have no idea how the real world works. Our former president came into this school with a top 30 USNEWS ranking and FBall/Bball programs on the rise. Now we suck at everything and he got a $1mm paid sabbatical to write a book and travel, all while he was making over $1mm a year serving on boards AT THE SAME TIME that he was president. No wonder the education bubble may burst.

The conferences that are getting the big bucks have invested in their programs for decades and EARNED the big contracts. They invested in facilities and their fanbases have responded accordingly. The members of the AAC have only invested in their programs recently and have NOT YET EARNED a big contract. Come back and debate the TV contract after investing in your school (facilities, coaches, full cost of attendance, etc.) and the conference organization.
My school is included in this debate. UC is spending $85 million on Nippert and will soon make a decision on the BB facility ($60 million or more?).
We need to stop complaining and do the hard work of EARNING a bigger TV contract.

(02-10-2015 01:48 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:38 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:00 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:44 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:34 PM)Bull Wrote:  Aresco almost single handedly secured the G5 access bowl slot. That's huge. ESPN matched but Aresco shopped the product around to get the NBC offer. There were certainly negotions. I'm no lawyer but I doubt the NBC/ESPN could be a 1:1 conversion, ESPN has more networks. The idea that the conference is on autopilot, as some seem to be suggesting, is ridiculous.

But lets talk money. If you honestly believe that a no-name brand new conference wtih primarily cUSA schools should have got near P5 TV $$$ with someone else at the helm... you are free to think that. Aresco took a SHORT deal with BIG exposure, with the full intent of building up the brand and re-negotiating in a few years. It was a best-available strategy given the hand we were dealt.

Near P5, they make 10X's more!!! 10X!! UConn and Cinci plus all the investments of the best of the best CUSA schools. He had options and the fact of the matter is that ESPN is getting a massive bargain.

We have been around and around this, I just disagree that Aresco has accomplished anything. Certainly nothing that any other manager could have done. I don't know where this idea that Aresco single handily secured the G5 slot (link).

I appreciate his marketing efforts, believe he is overpaid and has accomplished nothing. Certainly nothing that any somewhat competent person could accomplish. Again, our entire conference payout is close to what each individual P5 earns, that's messed up.

Around and around she goes, where she stops (will it ever stop) nobody knows.
I don't think anyone could have done a better job with a revamped Big East missing 90% of its old assets. No Big East Basketball powers except for UConn and the rebuilt but not restored Bearcats. This conference has the leftovers from the old Big East (Uconn, UC and USF). The best the old Big East were being offered was about $10million each and no increase in exposure. Pitt & Syracuse bolted, Louisville announced there intentions to go independent and West Virginia goes to the Big 12. The remaining BB schools say no to football and get $5million from Fox (with names like Villanova and Georgetown).
So with 3 leftovers from the old Big East (that had 16 schools) and the addition of the best of CUSA, the AAC is getting the kind of exposure (including my Bearcats) that was not seen by the old Big East. And yet the minority complaints about Aresco continue.
Around and around we go, where she stops....

Not to mention that Aresco's salary is approved by the presidents of the member schools. So if he is overpaid, there are 12 stupid/incompetent presidents out there.

You forgot to add that the BE gets $5mm for Bball only when we know FBall drives the bus. I just don't see how $2.1mm for FBall and Bball with these brands/markets is justified considering other contracts out there. But yes, I agree the Aresco argument is a merry go round at this point.

Yes, school admins are incompetent when it comes to salary, they have no idea how the real world works. Our former president came into this school with a top 30 USNEWS ranking and FBall/Bball programs on the rise. Now we suck at everything and he got a $1mm paid sabbatical to write a book and travel, all while he was making over $1mm a year serving on boards AT THE SAME TIME that he was president. No wonder the education bubble may burst.

The conferences that are getting the big bucks have invested in their programs for decades and EARNED the big contracts. They invested in facilities and their fanbases have responded accordingly. The members of the AAC have only invested in their programs recently and have NOT YET EARNED a big contract. Come back and debate the TV contract after investing in your school (facilities, coaches, full cost of attendance, etc.) and the conference organization.
My school is included in this debate. UC is spending $85 million on Nippert and will soon make a decision on the BB facility ($60 million or more?).
We need to stop complaining and do the hard work of EARNING a bigger TV contract.

Of course. My argument isn't that we should be in the same country as the P5 instead we are about two universes away ($2mm vs $20mm+). More like something in the range of the BBall only BE seems appropriate. I mean really NOVA and GTown Bball are really not that much greater when you consider the markets, brands and addition of FBall in the AAC yet our contract is less than half, IDK. Ya, ESPN carries more exposure but less than half????

As for investing, the big time investments have come over the last 15 years or so and are correlated to their contracts. It's hard for schools in the AAC to be anywhere close investment wise when we make 1/10 of the money.
Who is going to stop the merry go round, I will do my best.

(02-10-2015 12:44 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  I appreciate his marketing efforts, believe he is overpaid and has accomplished nothing. Certainly nothing that any somewhat competent person could accomplish. Again, our entire conference payout is close to what each individual P5 earns, that's messed up.

Be grateful!

Because, it's the final additions (which include Tulane) that upset the applecart with the Western schools and the C7.

The AAC (Big East) would be making more with Boise, Georgetown, and Nova.

So, if you really wish we had gotten a fatter TV deal, you wouldn't be enjoying the spoils anyway. You'd be in CUSA.

Lucky for you it turned out like it did. Now, we have to solidify and improve the deal. Complaining at this point is illogical wavefan. Your school needs to get better. And, while you're at it, mail Aresco a BIG FAT "THANK YOU, SIR" NOTE. It's because of Aresco and UCF that you made the cut.

(02-10-2015 02:01 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:48 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:38 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:00 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 12:44 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Near P5, they make 10X's more!!! 10X!! UConn and Cinci plus all the investments of the best of the best CUSA schools. He had options and the fact of the matter is that ESPN is getting a massive bargain.

We have been around and around this, I just disagree that Aresco has accomplished anything. Certainly nothing that any other manager could have done. I don't know where this idea that Aresco single handily secured the G5 slot (link).

I appreciate his marketing efforts, believe he is overpaid and has accomplished nothing. Certainly nothing that any somewhat competent person could accomplish. Again, our entire conference payout is close to what each individual P5 earns, that's messed up.

Around and around she goes, where she stops (will it ever stop) nobody knows.
I don't think anyone could have done a better job with a revamped Big East missing 90% of its old assets. No Big East Basketball powers except for UConn and the rebuilt but not restored Bearcats. This conference has the leftovers from the old Big East (Uconn, UC and USF). The best the old Big East were being offered was about $10million each and no increase in exposure. Pitt & Syracuse bolted, Louisville announced there intentions to go independent and West Virginia goes to the Big 12. The remaining BB schools say no to football and get $5million from Fox (with names like Villanova and Georgetown).
So with 3 leftovers from the old Big East (that had 16 schools) and the addition of the best of CUSA, the AAC is getting the kind of exposure (including my Bearcats) that was not seen by the old Big East. And yet the minority complaints about Aresco continue.
Around and around we go, where she stops....

Not to mention that Aresco's salary is approved by the presidents of the member schools. So if he is overpaid, there are 12 stupid/incompetent presidents out there.

You forgot to add that the BE gets $5mm for Bball only when we know FBall drives the bus. I just don't see how $2.1mm for FBall and Bball with these brands/markets is justified considering other contracts out there. But yes, I agree the Aresco argument is a merry go round at this point.

Yes, school admins are incompetent when it comes to salary, they have no idea how the real world works. Our former president came into this school with a top 30 USNEWS ranking and FBall/Bball programs on the rise. Now we suck at everything and he got a $1mm paid sabbatical to write a book and travel, all while he was making over $1mm a year serving on boards AT THE SAME TIME that he was president. No wonder the education bubble may burst.

The conferences that are getting the big bucks have invested in their programs for decades and EARNED the big contracts. They invested in facilities and their fanbases have responded accordingly. The members of the AAC have only invested in their programs recently and have NOT YET EARNED a big contract. Come back and debate the TV contract after investing in your school (facilities, coaches, full cost of attendance, etc.) and the conference organization.
My school is included in this debate. UC is spending $85 million on Nippert and will soon make a decision on the BB facility ($60 million or more?).
We need to stop complaining and do the hard work of EARNING a bigger TV contract.

Of course. My argument isn't that we should be in the same country as the P5 instead we are about two universes away ($2mm vs $20mm+). More like something in the range of the BBall only BE seems appropriate. I mean really NOVA and GTown Bball are really not that much greater when you consider the markets, brands and addition of FBall in the AAC yet our contract is less than half, IDK. Ya, ESPN carries more exposure but less than half????

As for investing, the big time investments have come over the last 15 years or so and are correlated to their contracts. It's hard for schools in the AAC to be anywhere close investment wise when we make 1/10 of the money.
Who is going to stop the merry go round, I will do my best.

How did the Money 5 conferences get the big bucks. They PREVIOUSLY (40 -50 - 60 years or more) invested and now they are getting the return on their investment. The AAC members are going to have to dig deep (alums) to get back in the game. Tulane built a new stadium and so did others. Bearcats are dropping $150 million in new additions to Nippert and 5/3 BB arena. UC is spending millions on the coaching staffs. Bearcats are going to go toe to toe on Full Cost of Attendance. This spending is called Investments. ((Its the same reason parents spend/borrow money to pay/invest in their kids education. The kids in turn take their parents out to dinner from time to time (the return on investment) after graduation and landing a paying job)).
Its only after investing in your programs and winning some Big Games can the AAC demand a bigger TV contract. To put this on Aresco is a pretty weak to me. And if you don't have the dough to invest, now is the time to pull the plug.

(02-10-2015 03:15 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 02:01 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:48 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:38 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:00 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  Around and around she goes, where she stops (will it ever stop) nobody knows.
I don't think anyone could have done a better job with a revamped Big East missing 90% of its old assets. No Big East Basketball powers except for UConn and the rebuilt but not restored Bearcats. This conference has the leftovers from the old Big East (Uconn, UC and USF). The best the old Big East were being offered was about $10million each and no increase in exposure. Pitt & Syracuse bolted, Louisville announced there intentions to go independent and West Virginia goes to the Big 12. The remaining BB schools say no to football and get $5million from Fox (with names like Villanova and Georgetown).
So with 3 leftovers from the old Big East (that had 16 schools) and the addition of the best of CUSA, the AAC is getting the kind of exposure (including my Bearcats) that was not seen by the old Big East. And yet the minority complaints about Aresco continue.
Around and around we go, where she stops....

Not to mention that Aresco's salary is approved by the presidents of the member schools. So if he is overpaid, there are 12 stupid/incompetent presidents out there.

You forgot to add that the BE gets $5mm for Bball only when we know FBall drives the bus. I just don't see how $2.1mm for FBall and Bball with these brands/markets is justified considering other contracts out there. But yes, I agree the Aresco argument is a merry go round at this point.

Yes, school admins are incompetent when it comes to salary, they have no idea how the real world works. Our former president came into this school with a top 30 USNEWS ranking and FBall/Bball programs on the rise. Now we suck at everything and he got a $1mm paid sabbatical to write a book and travel, all while he was making over $1mm a year serving on boards AT THE SAME TIME that he was president. No wonder the education bubble may burst.

The conferences that are getting the big bucks have invested in their programs for decades and EARNED the big contracts. They invested in facilities and their fanbases have responded accordingly. The members of the AAC have only invested in their programs recently and have NOT YET EARNED a big contract. Come back and debate the TV contract after investing in your school (facilities, coaches, full cost of attendance, etc.) and the conference organization.
My school is included in this debate. UC is spending $85 million on Nippert and will soon make a decision on the BB facility ($60 million or more?).
We need to stop complaining and do the hard work of EARNING a bigger TV contract.

Of course. My argument isn't that we should be in the same country as the P5 instead we are about two universes away ($2mm vs $20mm+). More like something in the range of the BBall only BE seems appropriate. I mean really NOVA and GTown Bball are really not that much greater when you consider the markets, brands and addition of FBall in the AAC yet our contract is less than half, IDK. Ya, ESPN carries more exposure but less than half????

As for investing, the big time investments have come over the last 15 years or so and are correlated to their contracts. It's hard for schools in the AAC to be anywhere close investment wise when we make 1/10 of the money.
Who is going to stop the merry go round, I will do my best.

How did the Money 5 conferences get the big bucks. They PREVIOUSLY invested (40 -50 - 60 years or more) and now they are getting the return on their investment. The AAC members are going to have to dig deep (alums) to get back in the game. Tulane built a new stadium and so did others. Bearcats are dropping $150 million in new additions to Nippert and 5/3 BB arena. UC is spending millions on the coaching staffs. Bearcats are going to go toe to toe on Full Cost of Attendance. This spending is called Investments. ((Its the same reason parents spend/borrow money to pay/invest in their kids education. The kids in turn take their parents out to dinner for time to time (the return on investment) after graduation and landing a paying job)).
Its only after investing in your programs and winning some Big Games can the AAC demand a bigger TV contract. To put this on Aresco is a pretty weak to me. And if you don't have the dough to invest, now is the time to pull the plug.

I get that, but really only the big boys had invested, now they all are.

Anyways, I don't know if I blame Aresco, I am just saying he accomplished nothing. A trained monkey could have got a $2.1mm matching deal with these brands/markets. I do question the optionality in the contract but I don't know how these things work from an options standpoint. Then to see the BE get more than double for Bball only, SMH. I know Fox wanted a signature series but I can't understand how getting BE Bball only is worth more to them than BBall AND FBALL for the AAC, actually worth double. Can we stop now. We agree to disagree just like many others. Lets all hope the next contract makes up for it.

(02-10-2015 03:15 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 02:01 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:48 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:38 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 01:00 PM)Bearcat61 Wrote:  Around and around she goes, where she stops (will it ever stop) nobody knows.
I don't think anyone could have done a better job with a revamped Big East missing 90% of its old assets. No Big East Basketball powers except for UConn and the rebuilt but not restored Bearcats. This conference has the leftovers from the old Big East (Uconn, UC and USF). The best the old Big East were being offered was about $10million each and no increase in exposure. Pitt & Syracuse bolted, Louisville announced there intentions to go independent and West Virginia goes to the Big 12. The remaining BB schools say no to football and get $5million from Fox (with names like Villanova and Georgetown).
So with 3 leftovers from the old Big East (that had 16 schools) and the addition of the best of CUSA, the AAC is getting the kind of exposure (including my Bearcats) that was not seen by the old Big East. And yet the minority complaints about Aresco continue.
Around and around we go, where she stops....

Not to mention that Aresco's salary is approved by the presidents of the member schools. So if he is overpaid, there are 12 stupid/incompetent presidents out there.

You forgot to add that the BE gets $5mm for Bball only when we know FBall drives the bus. I just don't see how $2.1mm for FBall and Bball with these brands/markets is justified considering other contracts out there. But yes, I agree the Aresco argument is a merry go round at this point.

Yes, school admins are incompetent when it comes to salary, they have no idea how the real world works. Our former president came into this school with a top 30 USNEWS ranking and FBall/Bball programs on the rise. Now we suck at everything and he got a $1mm paid sabbatical to write a book and travel, all while he was making over $1mm a year serving on boards AT THE SAME TIME that he was president. No wonder the education bubble may burst.

The conferences that are getting the big bucks have invested in their programs for decades and EARNED the big contracts. They invested in facilities and their fanbases have responded accordingly. The members of the AAC have only invested in their programs recently and have NOT YET EARNED a big contract. Come back and debate the TV contract after investing in your school (facilities, coaches, full cost of attendance, etc.) and the conference organization.
My school is included in this debate. UC is spending $85 million on Nippert and will soon make a decision on the BB facility ($60 million or more?).
We need to stop complaining and do the hard work of EARNING a bigger TV contract.

Of course. My argument isn't that we should be in the same country as the P5 instead we are about two universes away ($2mm vs $20mm+). More like something in the range of the BBall only BE seems appropriate. I mean really NOVA and GTown Bball are really not that much greater when you consider the markets, brands and addition of FBall in the AAC yet our contract is less than half, IDK. Ya, ESPN carries more exposure but less than half????

As for investing, the big time investments have come over the last 15 years or so and are correlated to their contracts. It's hard for schools in the AAC to be anywhere close investment wise when we make 1/10 of the money.
Who is going to stop the merry go round, I will do my best.

How did the Money 5 conferences get the big bucks. They PREVIOUSLY invested (40 -50 - 60 years or more) and now they are getting the return on their investment. The AAC members are going to have to dig deep (alums) to get back in the game. Tulane built a new stadium and so did others. Bearcats are dropping $150 million in new additions to Nippert and 5/3 BB arena. UC is spending millions on the coaching staffs. Bearcats are going to go toe to toe on Full Cost of Attendance. This spending is called Investments. ((Its the same reason parents spend/borrow money to pay/invest in their kids education. The kids in turn take their parents out to dinner for time to time (the return on investment) after graduation and landing a paying job)).
Its only after investing in your programs and winning some Big Games can the AAC demand a bigger TV contract. To put this on Aresco is a pretty weak to me. And if you don't have the dough to invest, now is the time to pull the plug.

This is the argument that won't die. I agree that the investments are happening now and that all of the schools are trying to make themselves P5 worthy. If a good group of them are able to establish themselves as such and no opening happens then it will be all the better for the conference. I think Aresco took a calculated gamble based on what he had and knew from his vast experience in the tv industry. The money wasn't going to be there regardless of who negotiated the deal so I don't know why everyone gets so bent on those specifics. He knew he had some brands but that the exposure would potentially build others brands that had value (i.e. SMU Basketball) see how quickly that brand is developing. The goal being with the short deal to have some statistical evidence that supports what we are worth. Given what was thrown together and even the thoughts that it wouldn't stay together as it existed left media companies with a lot of reservations about making a solid offer. I think he is sowing things now that will reap rewards when the next tv deal and bowl contracts are negotiated. I think then and only then can you judge what he has done. This of course is all contingent on the conference staying together and continuing to invest. I honestly think based on the rating and collection of markets and where the conference appears to be heading is easily within the 8-10 range annually. That would firmly put the conference in between the haves and have not's.