(09-27-2016 01:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If Big 12 snubs expansion this year, this is what Aresco should do:

AAC GOR, with a buy out. Something unprecedented, like $50M to get out of the GOR should the Big 12 change its mind next year for example.

a move like that, however unlikely to be signed on by all AAC members, would literally doom the big 12.

(09-27-2016 02:22 PM)Carolina Stang Wrote:  I don't recall the last time Kansas was ranked in football...probably when Mangino coached.

Meanwhile the AAC consistently has teams in the top 25 and even the top 10. I get that the AAC doesn't have a Texas or OU, but that is the only difference.

FWIW, for the past 10 years, the 8 teams currently in the Big XII not named Oklahoma or Texas appeared in the Top 25 of the final BCS or CFP rankings a total of 26 times. Ten of those were Top 10 appearances.

For the same period, the 12 current members of the AAC made a total of 11 Top 25 appearances, one of which was a Top 10.

I'd say that's a difference.

(09-27-2016 01:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If Big 12 snubs expansion this year, this is what Aresco should do:

AAC GOR, with a buy out. Something unprecedented, like $50M to get out of the GOR should the Big 12 change its mind next year for example.

Schools that theoretically still have a chance to advance to the Big 12 or another Power 5 conference at another point in the future will never agree to a GOR (Houston, Cincy, UConn, USF, UCF, SMU). Even Temple and ECU/Memphis would be inclined to decline as they are in the ACC and ACC/SEC footprints respectively and you never know what could happen in the world or realignment. With all of those schools looking to get out, Navy would decline a GOR as well as they don't want to be stuck in a gutted conference. Only Tulsa and Tulane would go for the GOR.

(09-27-2016 03:08 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 02:22 PM)Carolina Stang Wrote:  I don't recall the last time Kansas was ranked in football...probably when Mangino coached.

Meanwhile the AAC consistently has teams in the top 25 and even the top 10. I get that the AAC doesn't have a Texas or OU, but that is the only difference.

FWIW, for the past 10 years, the 8 teams currently in the Big XII not named Oklahoma or Texas appeared in the Top 25 of the final BCS or CFP rankings a total of 26 times. Ten of those were Top 10 appearances.

For the same period, the 12 current members of the AAC made a total of 11 Top 25 appearances, one of which was a Top 10.

I'd say that's a difference.

I would agree there is a difference, although it is tough to measure the last 10 years as every one of the AAC programs were in different (mostly weaker) conferences, therefore making it more difficult to achieve a top 10 ranking. But I do see your point.

(09-27-2016 01:06 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 12:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Too early to say. But if this holds true, then he did pull a rabbit out of his hat.

Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not? If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

I dont think Aresco pulled a rabbit out of his hat so much as it is the Big12 just cant get on the same page. The AAC isn't going to be a P5, but it is absolutely on its way to a huge raise if it stays intact.

But you still haven't answered the underlying question. If Houston, Cincy, USF, UCF, UConn, etc. are all good enough to warrant serious consideration to be added to a power conference (and by the way at least 4 of those WERE in a previous power conference), then why can't the AAC be a power conference again. Give me a logical, well thought out, reason. Not just because the power brokers don't like it and said so. Is there some hard cap on upward mobility?

the reason no other conference is a part of the "P" conference system is with the exception of a couple of schools in the AAC none of these other programs or conferences had a hand in building the bowl games that predated the BCS and that lead to the BCS that then lead to the playoffs

people want to forge the history of the major bowl games and they want to forget the fact that for 75+ years the Big 10 and PAC 8/10/12 built the Rose Bowl into the major event that it is today and the SEC SEC SEC built up the Sugar Bowl and the Big 8 helped make the Orange Bowl and the SWC the Cotton Bowl

all of those conferences could have kept WHAT THEY BUILT INTO MAJOR ENTERPRISES AND MONEY MAKERS and they could have continued to do things as they were and let the media declare a national champ

but they came together to "horse trade" a few teams for slots in those games to get some bigger match ups and at that time they GAVE the other conferences the chance to slot into some of those games

then the other conferences still cried because they pretended as though the major bowl system was more like the NCAAs when it was not...it was BUILT BY THE CONFERENCES and those conferences were under no obligation to let in teams to those games that had contributed NOTHING over the years to those games and the brand of those games

then with all the crying about the BCS and with more TV money offered by ESPN there was an agreement for the playoffs

but still if the G5 teams are not happy with the current situation they can always take their ball and go home they can go join with the Dig David State Division of Football and form their own playoffs and go demand hundreds of millions from ESPN or Fox or whoever and when they get told "we will pass on this opportunity thank you" they can learn a lesson in economics and supply and demand

(09-27-2016 01:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If Big 12 snubs expansion this year, this is what Aresco should do:

AAC GOR, with a buy out. Something unprecedented, like $50M to get out of the GOR should the Big 12 change its mind next year for example.

this is nonsense predicated on a clear lack of understanding about how a GOR works and how an exit fee works and specifically why you do not include an exit fee in a contract that also has a GOR involved

all of this has been thoroughly covered in the past and you are clearly too thick to still get it

as to the exit fee specifically just like with Maryland you as a CONFERENCE have to prove the exit fee is not punitive and $50 million to leave the AAC would be stupidly punitive

as to the GOR this is again why you have SEPARATE CONTRACTS for a GOR and for conference membership.....because with a GOR it is up to the TEAM LEAVING to prove damages for not retaining their media rights

(09-27-2016 01:11 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 01:03 PM)MechaKnight Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not?

Probably not. The term "Power Conference" isn't anything official, it was invented by ESPN to describe the 5 conferences enormous advantages over everyone else. We would need to get the same enormous advantages first (huge TV deal, NY6 bowl contract) and then make a case for getting in on autonomy voting

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

Most AAC programs are good enough to be members of a power conference, but each P5 has 1-2 superpower, blue blooded, flagship program that call the shots in negotiations. We don't have anyone like that. Which will make it hard to get those big TV & Bowl deals.

OK, I get your point. We have no Texas or Oklahoma. Having said that, what really is the difference between a Houston, Cincinnati, USF, UCF, Memphis, and UConn and, for example a Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, an West Virginia.

Really, what's the difference? (I'm not knocking those schools, some are good programs and I'd love to join them).

budgets, fan support, facilities among other things

lets take the teams you listed

Texas Tech has an $80 million dollar budget.....$3.2 million of that was from student fees and $1 million from other school funds

so if you subtract that from $80 million you get $75.8 million.....if you subtract 100% of the $26.5 million they got from the Big 12 that year you still have $54.3 million for a budget with ZERO university or student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

dem coogs doh have a budget of $45.4 million with $26 million of that FROM SCHOOL AND STUDENT FUNDS

so Texas Tech has almost a $9 million dollar larger budget than dem coogs doh with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

Cincy is a budget of $53.7 with $23 from the university/students

WVU is $87 with $4.4 from the students/university

ISU is $75 with $2 from the students/university

KU is $92 with $2 from the students/university

KSU is $67 with $800k from the students/university

OkState is $93 with $8 from the students/university

TCU and Baylor are not listed because they are private, but both are spending well into the $80s and they get a lot of donations, ticket sales ect as well

USF $47 million $21 from the students and university

UCF $47.6 and $24.7 from the students and university

Memphis $43 and $18

only UConn with $72 a million budget and $28 of that from the students/university would even be close to being in the same realm financially and even then if you took away 100% of their student/university dollars and KEPT their $10 million from the AAC they would only be right at what the Big 12 schools you listed would be at with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

so that is the answer......fan support, alumni support and budgets that is the MAJOR difference and that is still the MAJOR difference when you take out 100% of the university and student dollars from Big 12 schools AND 100% of their Big 12 dollars

there is simply no comparison for all but UConn and even then you have to give UConn all the benefits and take it all away from Big 12 schools to get close to the same

(09-27-2016 11:39 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Little Mike must be ecstatic over the apparent Big 12 decision to forego/table expansion. He can continue to build his conference and maybe wedge into the P6 after all.

There is a zero % chance of that ever happening.

Ever.

(09-27-2016 03:08 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 02:22 PM)Carolina Stang Wrote:  I don't recall the last time Kansas was ranked in football...probably when Mangino coached.

Meanwhile the AAC consistently has teams in the top 25 and even the top 10. I get that the AAC doesn't have a Texas or OU, but that is the only difference.

FWIW, for the past 10 years, the 8 teams currently in the Big XII not named Oklahoma or Texas appeared in the Top 25 of the final BCS or CFP rankings a total of 26 times. Ten of those were Top 10 appearances.

For the same period, the 12 current members of the AAC made a total of 11 Top 25 appearances, one of which was a Top 10.

I'd say that's a difference.

slight correction. TWO members were top 10. UCF in 2013 and Houston last year.

A GOR is not going to happen in the AAC. Now if TV deal tripled, (Unlikely) a big bump in buy out could happen. lets say 15 to 20 mil to leave. My hope is B12 holds off, and we can get to renegotiate. I still don't buy any 10-12 mil deal. But 5 to 7 may be doable. Get that kind of money, and one bowl a notch up the pecking order for #2/champ if not in Access, and we will have a true tweener conf in place.

Todge,

Don't even get into budgets. Facts are facts and I can only speak for us and your numbers look right but you're missing one key factor.

Tech and the like have had 20 plus years enjoying the fat paychecks that come with BCS and now P5 status.

Don't act like they all came in from the cold with budgets, fanbases, and facilities that big.

(09-27-2016 03:34 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 01:06 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 12:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Too early to say. But if this holds true, then he did pull a rabbit out of his hat.

Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not? If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

I dont think Aresco pulled a rabbit out of his hat so much as it is the Big12 just cant get on the same page. The AAC isn't going to be a P5, but it is absolutely on its way to a huge raise if it stays intact.

But you still haven't answered the underlying question. If Houston, Cincy, USF, UCF, UConn, etc. are all good enough to warrant serious consideration to be added to a power conference (and by the way at least 4 of those WERE in a previous power conference), then why can't the AAC be a power conference again. Give me a logical, well thought out, reason. Not just because the power brokers don't like it and said so. Is there some hard cap on upward mobility?

the reason no other conference is a part of the "P" conference system is with the exception of a couple of schools in the AAC none of these other programs or conferences had a hand in building the bowl games that predated the BCS and that lead to the BCS that then lead to the playoffs

people want to forge the history of the major bowl games and they want to forget the fact that for 75+ years the Big 10 and PAC 8/10/12 built the Rose Bowl into the major event that it is today and the SEC SEC SEC built up the Sugar Bowl and the Big 8 helped make the Orange Bowl and the SWC the Cotton Bowl

all of those conferences could have kept WHAT THEY BUILT INTO MAJOR ENTERPRISES AND MONEY MAKERS and they could have continued to do things as they were and let the media declare a national champ

but they came together to "horse trade" a few teams for slots in those games to get some bigger match ups and at that time they GAVE the other conferences the chance to slot into some of those games

then the other conferences still cried because they pretended as though the major bowl system was more like the NCAAs when it was not...it was BUILT BY THE CONFERENCES and those conferences were under no obligation to let in teams to those games that had contributed NOTHING over the years to those games and the brand of those games

then with all the crying about the BCS and with more TV money offered by ESPN there was an agreement for the playoffs

but still if the G5 teams are not happy with the current situation they can always take their ball and go home they can go join with the Dig David State Division of Football and form their own playoffs and go demand hundreds of millions from ESPN or Fox or whoever and when they get told "we will pass on this opportunity thank you" they can learn a lesson in economics and supply and demand

(09-27-2016 01:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If Big 12 snubs expansion this year, this is what Aresco should do:

AAC GOR, with a buy out. Something unprecedented, like $50M to get out of the GOR should the Big 12 change its mind next year for example.

this is nonsense predicated on a clear lack of understanding about how a GOR works and how an exit fee works and specifically why you do not include an exit fee in a contract that also has a GOR involved

all of this has been thoroughly covered in the past and you are clearly too thick to still get it

as to the exit fee specifically just like with Maryland you as a CONFERENCE have to prove the exit fee is not punitive and $50 million to leave the AAC would be stupidly punitive

as to the GOR this is again why you have SEPARATE CONTRACTS for a GOR and for conference membership.....because with a GOR it is up to the TEAM LEAVING to prove damages for not retaining their media rights

(09-27-2016 01:11 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 01:03 PM)MechaKnight Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not?

Probably not. The term "Power Conference" isn't anything official, it was invented by ESPN to describe the 5 conferences enormous advantages over everyone else. We would need to get the same enormous advantages first (huge TV deal, NY6 bowl contract) and then make a case for getting in on autonomy voting

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

Most AAC programs are good enough to be members of a power conference, but each P5 has 1-2 superpower, blue blooded, flagship program that call the shots in negotiations. We don't have anyone like that. Which will make it hard to get those big TV & Bowl deals.

OK, I get your point. We have no Texas or Oklahoma. Having said that, what really is the difference between a Houston, Cincinnati, USF, UCF, Memphis, and UConn and, for example a Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, an West Virginia.

Really, what's the difference? (I'm not knocking those schools, some are good programs and I'd love to join them).

budgets, fan support, facilities among other things

lets take the teams you listed

Texas Tech has an $80 million dollar budget.....$3.2 million of that was from student fees and $1 million from other school funds

so if you subtract that from $80 million you get $75.8 million.....if you subtract 100% of the $26.5 million they got from the Big 12 that year you still have $54.3 million for a budget with ZERO university or student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

dem coogs doh have a budget of $45.4 million with $26 million of that FROM SCHOOL AND STUDENT FUNDS

so Texas Tech has almost a $9 million dollar larger budget than dem coogs doh with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

Cincy is a budget of $53.7 with $23 from the university/students

WVU is $87 with $4.4 from the students/university

ISU is $75 with $2 from the students/university

KU is $92 with $2 from the students/university

KSU is $67 with $800k from the students/university

OkState is $93 with $8 from the students/university

TCU and Baylor are not listed because they are private, but both are spending well into the $80s and they get a lot of donations, ticket sales ect as well

USF $47 million $21 from the students and university

UCF $47.6 and $24.7 from the students and university

Memphis $43 and $18

only UConn with $72 a million budget and $28 of that from the students/university would even be close to being in the same realm financially and even then if you took away 100% of their student/university dollars and KEPT their $10 million from the AAC they would only be right at what the Big 12 schools you listed would be at with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

so that is the answer......fan support, alumni support and budgets that is the MAJOR difference and that is still the MAJOR difference when you take out 100% of the university and student dollars from Big 12 schools AND 100% of their Big 12 dollars

there is simply no comparison for all but UConn and even then you have to give UConn all the benefits and take it all away from Big 12 schools to get close to the same

The problem with that argument is the those bowls are entirely unnecessary to the playoff value. A 4 team playoff would have been just as valuable without being the "Rose Bowl". That said, it is a legitimate argument that the P5 had to give up a significant level of tradition and proven money making ability in their long standing anchor bowl games to create the BCS/playoff.

However, nobody has ever said the P5 were not deserving of a bigger slice of the pie as their earnings power is greater. What people have said is that the sport needs an open system that, like the rest of the NCAA championships, has some degree of access available to every team at the beginning of the season. Frankly, its not even necessary that the system access be "equal" so much as it just be legitimately "open". The current system essentially eliminates half the schools before the first practice of the season.

Id say a 8 team playoff with he P5 being AQ and the top G5 being AQ would be enough to create a playoff with reasonable access to all. Still two wild cards left to award deserving runners up or indy schools. The current money split is more than reasonable given the current difference in media payouts. Essentially, every school would have a legitimate path into the playoff. Effectively, there would still be a huge pro-P5 bias---with 7 slots available to 65 P5 schools and one slot available to the 65 G5 schools---but at least every school could say they had a real path to the playoff and that they controlled their own playoff destiny at the beginning of every season.

The AAC cannot be a P5 until it has anchor schools like UT and Ohio St that draw 80-100K per game. The best it can do is be a "tweener" conference that is similar to the old Big East conference. The Big East was never paid like the other P5's because it really didn't have anchor schools. A "tweener" style AAC wont be paid like a P5 either---but it might make a lot more than its currently paid.

(09-27-2016 11:39 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Little Mike must be ecstatic over the apparent Big 12 decision to forego/table expansion. He can continue to build his conference and maybe wedge into the P6 after all. Admittedly I have not been a fan, but he certainly runs the AAC much better than Bowlsby does his domain.

https://twitter.com/Jake_Trotter/status/...wsrc%5Etfw

Jake Trotter @Jake_Trotter
Statement from Oklahoma president David Boren in response to reports he “is now opposed to Big 12 expansion.”
5:14 PM - 27 Sep 2016

Boren: "I do not know where the speculation came from, but Oklahoma has not yet taken a position on expansion."

(09-27-2016 01:31 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  What contingency??? The CUSA? Sun Belt? Independence??

Sorry, but if you're East of the Mississippi, there is nothing else equivalent, once you've climbed the ladder up to the AAC level. It's either down, or up.

At the same time, Arseco has no leverage. What if everyone tells him to cram it with walnuts when he trots out the GOR? He's not going to kick them out (even if he had that power) and replace them with some patchwork quilt of C-USA and Sun Belt teams.

But even if Arseco could somehow gin up a GOR and pass it, would some of those schools take a lesser conference in order to remove themselves from an onerous yoke? That's basically what BYU did in (at the time) downgrading their basketball conference to embrace football independence.

Would UConn take football independence and affiliation with an Eastern basketball conference over having to shell out $50M or cede GOR if they get invited to a P5 conference? Temple? If Houston and Cincy are convinced that they're in when the Big 12 finally expands, do they leave the AAC now and avoid dealing with GOR and/or buyouts? It's not ideal, but is it more ideal than GOR and buyouts? My gut says possibly.

(09-27-2016 03:34 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 01:06 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 12:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Too early to say. But if this holds true, then he did pull a rabbit out of his hat.

Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not? If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

I dont think Aresco pulled a rabbit out of his hat so much as it is the Big12 just cant get on the same page. The AAC isn't going to be a P5, but it is absolutely on its way to a huge raise if it stays intact.

But you still haven't answered the underlying question. If Houston, Cincy, USF, UCF, UConn, etc. are all good enough to warrant serious consideration to be added to a power conference (and by the way at least 4 of those WERE in a previous power conference), then why can't the AAC be a power conference again. Give me a logical, well thought out, reason. Not just because the power brokers don't like it and said so. Is there some hard cap on upward mobility?

the reason no other conference is a part of the "P" conference system is with the exception of a couple of schools in the AAC none of these other programs or conferences had a hand in building the bowl games that predated the BCS and that lead to the BCS that then lead to the playoffs

people want to forge the history of the major bowl games and they want to forget the fact that for 75+ years the Big 10 and PAC 8/10/12 built the Rose Bowl into the major event that it is today and the SEC SEC SEC built up the Sugar Bowl and the Big 8 helped make the Orange Bowl and the SWC the Cotton Bowl

all of those conferences could have kept WHAT THEY BUILT INTO MAJOR ENTERPRISES AND MONEY MAKERS and they could have continued to do things as they were and let the media declare a national champ

but they came together to "horse trade" a few teams for slots in those games to get some bigger match ups and at that time they GAVE the other conferences the chance to slot into some of those games

then the other conferences still cried because they pretended as though the major bowl system was more like the NCAAs when it was not...it was BUILT BY THE CONFERENCES and those conferences were under no obligation to let in teams to those games that had contributed NOTHING over the years to those games and the brand of those games

then with all the crying about the BCS and with more TV money offered by ESPN there was an agreement for the playoffs

but still if the G5 teams are not happy with the current situation they can always take their ball and go home they can go join with the Dig David State Division of Football and form their own playoffs and go demand hundreds of millions from ESPN or Fox or whoever and when they get told "we will pass on this opportunity thank you" they can learn a lesson in economics and supply and demand

(09-27-2016 01:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If Big 12 snubs expansion this year, this is what Aresco should do:

AAC GOR, with a buy out. Something unprecedented, like $50M to get out of the GOR should the Big 12 change its mind next year for example.

this is nonsense predicated on a clear lack of understanding about how a GOR works and how an exit fee works and specifically why you do not include an exit fee in a contract that also has a GOR involved

all of this has been thoroughly covered in the past and you are clearly too thick to still get it

as to the exit fee specifically just like with Maryland you as a CONFERENCE have to prove the exit fee is not punitive and $50 million to leave the AAC would be stupidly punitive

as to the GOR this is again why you have SEPARATE CONTRACTS for a GOR and for conference membership.....because with a GOR it is up to the TEAM LEAVING to prove damages for not retaining their media rights

(09-27-2016 01:11 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 01:03 PM)MechaKnight Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not?

Probably not. The term "Power Conference" isn't anything official, it was invented by ESPN to describe the 5 conferences enormous advantages over everyone else. We would need to get the same enormous advantages first (huge TV deal, NY6 bowl contract) and then make a case for getting in on autonomy voting

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

Most AAC programs are good enough to be members of a power conference, but each P5 has 1-2 superpower, blue blooded, flagship program that call the shots in negotiations. We don't have anyone like that. Which will make it hard to get those big TV & Bowl deals.

OK, I get your point. We have no Texas or Oklahoma. Having said that, what really is the difference between a Houston, Cincinnati, USF, UCF, Memphis, and UConn and, for example a Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, an West Virginia.

Really, what's the difference? (I'm not knocking those schools, some are good programs and I'd love to join them).

budgets, fan support, facilities among other things

lets take the teams you listed

Texas Tech has an $80 million dollar budget.....$3.2 million of that was from student fees and $1 million from other school funds

so if you subtract that from $80 million you get $75.8 million.....if you subtract 100% of the $26.5 million they got from the Big 12 that year you still have $54.3 million for a budget with ZERO university or student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

dem coogs doh have a budget of $45.4 million with $26 million of that FROM SCHOOL AND STUDENT FUNDS

so Texas Tech has almost a $9 million dollar larger budget than dem coogs doh with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

Cincy is a budget of $53.7 with $23 from the university/students

WVU is $87 with $4.4 from the students/university

ISU is $75 with $2 from the students/university

KU is $92 with $2 from the students/university

KSU is $67 with $800k from the students/university

OkState is $93 with $8 from the students/university

TCU and Baylor are not listed because they are private, but both are spending well into the $80s and they get a lot of donations, ticket sales ect as well

USF $47 million $21 from the students and university

UCF $47.6 and $24.7 from the students and university

Memphis $43 and $18

only UConn with $72 a million budget and $28 of that from the students/university would even be close to being in the same realm financially and even then if you took away 100% of their student/university dollars and KEPT their $10 million from the AAC they would only be right at what the Big 12 schools you listed would be at with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

so that is the answer......fan support, alumni support and budgets that is the MAJOR difference and that is still the MAJOR difference when you take out 100% of the university and student dollars from Big 12 schools AND 100% of their Big 12 dollars

there is simply no comparison for all but UConn and even then you have to give UConn all the benefits and take it all away from Big 12 schools to get close to the same

The problem with your argument is that these teams receive 25M in TV revenue more than AAC teams, thus the higher budgets. If you swapped these programs with an AAC team and gave them 25M less to work with and the AAC team 25M more to work with, guess what, their budgets would go down to AAC levels and the AAC team's budget would go up 25M. It's logic!

(09-27-2016 04:02 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Todge,

Don't even get into budgets. Facts are facts and I can only speak for us and your numbers look right but you're missing one key factor.

Tech and the like have had 20 plus years enjoying the fat paychecks that come with BCS and now P5 status.

Don't act like they all came in from the cold with budgets, fanbases, and facilities that big.

yea lets not let facts get in the way of excuse making

and what are you are ignorant of is the fact that the only ones that put your program into the cold are your fans and your program and your administration

it was not the fault of any other team or program that your university refused to improve facilities, invest in your program, let basket ball die a quick and lasting death, fans did not show up to games, no alumni donations and on and on

you pretend a though there has always been some massive discrepancy in earnings between teams or the fact that one team gets more money from the conference somehow prevents YOUR FANS from showing up

when the time came for some programs to put up or shut up some programs shut up and some put up....too bad so sad for you

it is laughable that a team with some vocal fans that talk so much about dat market doh and 6 million people and "losing the Houston market" and all the people moving to Houston (that we are all suppose to believe will suddenly become dem coogs doh fans) has so many excuses about why THEIR FANS never show up in large numbers to games or why year in and year out their alumni do not support the program

you ended up right where you belonged in the CUSA with a bunch of other teams that were content to not spend a lot, not ask a lot of their fans, not expect a lot of their program and that would react slowly and way too late to change and instead would plod along getting the leftover spots and then jumping up and down and demanding more once you have a winning season or two in your new leftover spot

try being a bit proactive instead of reactive and here is another clue try living in the real world for where your programs stands now and in the immediate past instead of in the fantasy world of excuses

I mean how pathetic is it that after you take away 100% of the Big 12 money AND 100% of the academic and student side money from Big 12 programs and show them to have larger budgets still the only answer back is another excuse pretending as though somehow those Big 12 programs just lucked into a position to still have a larger budget with no conference money and no academic/student money than programs that are having all of that counted in their budget

how pathetic is it after a comparison like that someone can't look at that and realize that it was their program, fans and administration that failed it was not other programs being "lucky" or "having all the breaks"

this is why these programs STILL should not be P5 programs because their fans suck

(09-27-2016 05:19 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 03:34 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 01:06 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 12:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Too early to say. But if this holds true, then he did pull a rabbit out of his hat.

Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not? If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

I dont think Aresco pulled a rabbit out of his hat so much as it is the Big12 just cant get on the same page. The AAC isn't going to be a P5, but it is absolutely on its way to a huge raise if it stays intact.

But you still haven't answered the underlying question. If Houston, Cincy, USF, UCF, UConn, etc. are all good enough to warrant serious consideration to be added to a power conference (and by the way at least 4 of those WERE in a previous power conference), then why can't the AAC be a power conference again. Give me a logical, well thought out, reason. Not just because the power brokers don't like it and said so. Is there some hard cap on upward mobility?

the reason no other conference is a part of the "P" conference system is with the exception of a couple of schools in the AAC none of these other programs or conferences had a hand in building the bowl games that predated the BCS and that lead to the BCS that then lead to the playoffs

people want to forge the history of the major bowl games and they want to forget the fact that for 75+ years the Big 10 and PAC 8/10/12 built the Rose Bowl into the major event that it is today and the SEC SEC SEC built up the Sugar Bowl and the Big 8 helped make the Orange Bowl and the SWC the Cotton Bowl

all of those conferences could have kept WHAT THEY BUILT INTO MAJOR ENTERPRISES AND MONEY MAKERS and they could have continued to do things as they were and let the media declare a national champ

but they came together to "horse trade" a few teams for slots in those games to get some bigger match ups and at that time they GAVE the other conferences the chance to slot into some of those games

then the other conferences still cried because they pretended as though the major bowl system was more like the NCAAs when it was not...it was BUILT BY THE CONFERENCES and those conferences were under no obligation to let in teams to those games that had contributed NOTHING over the years to those games and the brand of those games

then with all the crying about the BCS and with more TV money offered by ESPN there was an agreement for the playoffs

but still if the G5 teams are not happy with the current situation they can always take their ball and go home they can go join with the Dig David State Division of Football and form their own playoffs and go demand hundreds of millions from ESPN or Fox or whoever and when they get told "we will pass on this opportunity thank you" they can learn a lesson in economics and supply and demand

(09-27-2016 01:10 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  If Big 12 snubs expansion this year, this is what Aresco should do:

AAC GOR, with a buy out. Something unprecedented, like $50M to get out of the GOR should the Big 12 change its mind next year for example.

this is nonsense predicated on a clear lack of understanding about how a GOR works and how an exit fee works and specifically why you do not include an exit fee in a contract that also has a GOR involved

all of this has been thoroughly covered in the past and you are clearly too thick to still get it

as to the exit fee specifically just like with Maryland you as a CONFERENCE have to prove the exit fee is not punitive and $50 million to leave the AAC would be stupidly punitive

as to the GOR this is again why you have SEPARATE CONTRACTS for a GOR and for conference membership.....because with a GOR it is up to the TEAM LEAVING to prove damages for not retaining their media rights

(09-27-2016 01:11 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 01:03 PM)MechaKnight Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Question, with the B12 seriously considering a number of AAC schools, if somehow Aresco can keep his league in tact, can the AAC get consideration as a power conference, and if not, why not?

Probably not. The term "Power Conference" isn't anything official, it was invented by ESPN to describe the 5 conferences enormous advantages over everyone else. We would need to get the same enormous advantages first (huge TV deal, NY6 bowl contract) and then make a case for getting in on autonomy voting

(09-27-2016 11:51 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If these programs were good enough to be seriously considered for a power conference, why can't the AAC be a power conference.

Most AAC programs are good enough to be members of a power conference, but each P5 has 1-2 superpower, blue blooded, flagship program that call the shots in negotiations. We don't have anyone like that. Which will make it hard to get those big TV & Bowl deals.

OK, I get your point. We have no Texas or Oklahoma. Having said that, what really is the difference between a Houston, Cincinnati, USF, UCF, Memphis, and UConn and, for example a Texas Tech, Baylor, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, an West Virginia.

Really, what's the difference? (I'm not knocking those schools, some are good programs and I'd love to join them).

budgets, fan support, facilities among other things

lets take the teams you listed

Texas Tech has an $80 million dollar budget.....$3.2 million of that was from student fees and $1 million from other school funds

so if you subtract that from $80 million you get $75.8 million.....if you subtract 100% of the $26.5 million they got from the Big 12 that year you still have $54.3 million for a budget with ZERO university or student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

dem coogs doh have a budget of $45.4 million with $26 million of that FROM SCHOOL AND STUDENT FUNDS

so Texas Tech has almost a $9 million dollar larger budget than dem coogs doh with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

Cincy is a budget of $53.7 with $23 from the university/students

WVU is $87 with $4.4 from the students/university

ISU is $75 with $2 from the students/university

KU is $92 with $2 from the students/university

KSU is $67 with $800k from the students/university

OkState is $93 with $8 from the students/university

TCU and Baylor are not listed because they are private, but both are spending well into the $80s and they get a lot of donations, ticket sales ect as well

USF $47 million $21 from the students and university

UCF $47.6 and $24.7 from the students and university

Memphis $43 and $18

only UConn with $72 a million budget and $28 of that from the students/university would even be close to being in the same realm financially and even then if you took away 100% of their student/university dollars and KEPT their $10 million from the AAC they would only be right at what the Big 12 schools you listed would be at with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

so that is the answer......fan support, alumni support and budgets that is the MAJOR difference and that is still the MAJOR difference when you take out 100% of the university and student dollars from Big 12 schools AND 100% of their Big 12 dollars

there is simply no comparison for all but UConn and even then you have to give UConn all the benefits and take it all away from Big 12 schools to get close to the same

The problem with your argument is that these teams receive 25M in TV revenue more than AAC teams, thus the higher budgets. If you swapped these programs with an AAC team and gave them 25M less to work with and the AAC team 25M more to work with, guess what, their budgets would go down to AAC levels and the AAC team's budget would go up 25M. It's logic!

no the problem is you do not have a clue what you are talking about

you must have missed the part where I took the Big 12 programs and SUBTRACTED 100% of their Big 12 money (that includes ALL THE TV MONEY) AND I excluded 100% of their academic and student fee money and those Big 12 programs still had larger budgets than AAC programs with 100% of their academic/student money and 100% of their conference money

I mean how much more fair of a comparison can one make to exclude 100% of the TV money and 100% of the academic side and student money

now you are really so mentally challenged that you expect a fair comparison to be take Texas Tech with an $80 million dollar budget, subtract $26.5 million in Big 12 money and a couple of million in academic/student side money (which still leaves Texas Tech with a $9 million dollar higher budget) and then take the budget of dem coogs doh or USF or UCF and ignore the fact that it includes massive academic/student subsidies that are well above Big 12 numbers AND that it STILL includes AAC money.....and just simply tack on $26.5 million more in Big 12 money and then say "see same budgets we are P5"......who taught your logic class Professor David State with MlpsBuffalo as a proctor/TA

and only a fool uses "logic" that says that fans will show up simply because their program gets more TV money

if your fans did not suck so bad they would show up if you did not get a dollar of TV money

are you really so "logical" that you are trying to claim that ISU gets 55,000 fans to games to see teams that lose a lot because their program gets $TV money from the Big 12

what is ISU paying fans to show up or are they giving away Big 12 TV money to the first 500 fans through the gate

your argument is pathetic and shows why G5 programs mostly remain G5 programs forever

(09-27-2016 02:33 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 02:22 PM)Carolina Stang Wrote:  I don't recall the last time Kansas was ranked in football...probably when Mangino coached.

Meanwhile the AAC consistently has teams in the top 25 and even the top 10. I get that the AAC doesn't have a Texas or OU, but that is the only difference.

Kansas had a great season 8 or 9 years ago when they went 12-1 (I think) and made a BCS Bowl. It's been very bleak ever since.
Cheers!

And they were great in 68 or 69.

Every program has that great season every 40 years.

(09-27-2016 03:34 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  budgets, fan support, facilities among other things

lets take the teams you listed

Texas Tech has an $80 million dollar budget.....$3.2 million of that was from student fees and $1 million from other school funds

so if you subtract that from $80 million you get $75.8 million.....if you subtract 100% of the $26.5 million they got from the Big 12 that year you still have $54.3 million for a budget with ZERO university or student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

dem coogs doh have a budget of $45.4 million with $26 million of that FROM SCHOOL AND STUDENT FUNDS

so Texas Tech has almost a $9 million dollar larger budget than dem coogs doh with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

Cincy is a budget of $53.7 with $23 from the university/students

WVU is $87 with $4.4 from the students/university

ISU is $75 with $2 from the students/university

KU is $92 with $2 from the students/university

KSU is $67 with $800k from the students/university

OkState is $93 with $8 from the students/university

TCU and Baylor are not listed because they are private, but both are spending well into the $80s and they get a lot of donations, ticket sales ect as well

USF $47 million $21 from the students and university

UCF $47.6 and $24.7 from the students and university

Memphis $43 and $18

only UConn with $72 a million budget and $28 of that from the students/university would even be close to being in the same realm financially and even then if you took away 100% of their student/university dollars and KEPT their $10 million from the AAC they would only be right at what the Big 12 schools you listed would be at with ZERO university/student dollars and ZERO Big 12 dollars

so that is the answer......fan support, alumni support and budgets that is the MAJOR difference and that is still the MAJOR difference when you take out 100% of the university and student dollars from Big 12 schools AND 100% of their Big 12 dollars

there is simply no comparison for all but UConn and even then you have to give UConn all the benefits and take it all away from Big 12 schools to get close to the same

Todge, the problem with those numbers is that they're not standardized across schools. For example, does parking revenue on gameday count as athletic department revenue? Apparel sales? I can tell you for 100% certain that these things don't count at UC (even some of our concession revenue is technically outside the stadium so it goes to the general fund). These are not small matters and there is even bigger leeway on the expense side.

UC has a small but vocal group of faculty who oppose sports funding. Our faculty are unionized(!) & these folks control the union so the dissenters have more power to make noise at UC than at other schools. So to shut them up we keep our reported revenues & expenses as low as possible.

(09-27-2016 04:02 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Todge,

Don't even get into budgets. Facts are facts and I can only speak for us and your numbers look right but you're missing one key factor.

Tech and the like have had 20 plus years enjoying the fat paychecks that come with BCS and now P5 status.

Don't act like they all came in from the cold with budgets, fanbases, and facilities that big.

You might as well say "Alabama and Notre Dame have the advantage of playing big games for over 90 years, thus allowing them to build huge fan bases and big national TV interest". Well duh, but that still means they have huge brand value and we don't. There was a time when they had no football value, too. Everyone starts with nothing.

Aresco and BigEastHomer at the AAC headquarters upon news that the Big XII might not expand after all.

(09-27-2016 05:24 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(09-27-2016 04:02 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  Todge,

Don't even get into budgets. Facts are facts and I can only speak for us and your numbers look right but you're missing one key factor.

Tech and the like have had 20 plus years enjoying the fat paychecks that come with BCS and now P5 status.

Don't act like they all came in from the cold with budgets, fanbases, and facilities that big.

yea lets not let facts get in the way of excuse making

and what are you are ignorant of is the fact that the only ones that put your program into the cold are your fans and your program and your administration

it was not the fault of any other team or program that your university refused to improve facilities, invest in your program, let basket ball die a quick and lasting death, fans did not show up to games, no alumni donations and on and on

you pretend a though there has always been some massive discrepancy in earnings between teams or the fact that one team gets more money from the conference somehow prevents YOUR FANS from showing up

when the time came for some programs to put up or shut up some programs shut up and some put up....too bad so sad for you

it is laughable that a team with some vocal fans that talk so much about dat market doh and 6 million people and "losing the Houston market" and all the people moving to Houston (that we are all suppose to believe will suddenly become dem coogs doh fans) has so many excuses about why THEIR FANS never show up in large numbers to games or why year in and year out their alumni do not support the program

you ended up right where you belonged in the CUSA with a bunch of other teams that were content to not spend a lot, not ask a lot of their fans, not expect a lot of their program and that would react slowly and way too late to change and instead would plod along getting the leftover spots and then jumping up and down and demanding more once you have a winning season or two in your new leftover spot

try being a bit proactive instead of reactive and here is another clue try living in the real world for where your programs stands now and in the immediate past instead of in the fantasy world of excuses

I mean how pathetic is it that after you take away 100% of the Big 12 money AND 100% of the academic and student side money from Big 12 programs and show them to have larger budgets still the only answer back is another excuse pretending as though somehow those Big 12 programs just lucked into a position to still have a larger budget with no conference money and no academic/student money than programs that are having all of that counted in their budget

how pathetic is it after a comparison like that someone can't look at that and realize that it was their program, fans and administration that failed it was not other programs being "lucky" or "having all the breaks"

this is why these programs STILL should not be P5 programs because their fans suck

How do you think they'd be doing when the highlight of their last 20 years was playing Texas St or UTSA?