(12-30-2020 12:39 AM)blazr Wrote:  

(12-29-2020 10:03 AM)colohank Wrote:  

(12-29-2020 08:33 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  .

Question: Why hasn't Mike Aresco picked up the phone and offered Boise a temporary 1-2 membership in the AAC yet, giving them a year or so to find themselves a suitable long-term arrangement, since it's starting to look like it might be the only way he can move his P6 strategic plan forward with the addition of Boise State?

Is the AAC leadership really so completely unimaginative that the possibility of bringing Boise State's football program into the AAC by making BSU BB/olympic sports a generous temporary arrangement has completely escaped them?

After all, they've got a slot open (the #12 slot, formerly occupied by Connecticut). Why not put it to good use?

Answer: Perhaps because the presidents of current institutions in the AAC would consider multiple factors other than football prowess before adding a new member. Better to stay at eleven as long as we possibly can than to add a distant and academically substandard school from a low-population state just because it's enjoyed some recent success on the gridiron.

Bingo. If there was 90% chance AAC adding a team in Idaho in any format would greatly increase profits & profile, it would have been long done by now. It’s not like the AAC would have to Google the phone number of Boise’s President and vice-versa.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The problem with that line of thinking is none of the known evidence supports it.

We already know these same schools have already found Boise acceptable as member back in 2011--but when the money didnt work out as expected---the MW gave Boise a sweet heart deal and Boise went back to the MW. Since then, the AAC got a big raise (making the AAC money more attractive to Boise) and it became even more attractive when the MW told Boise their special deal wasnt permanent (its now set to expire in 6 years).

As for RIGHT NOW---we already know from the emails that the AAC has absolutely ZERO issue with adding Boise---as long as it is for "football only". That tells me the only hangup is finding an acceptable place for Boise to stash their olympic sports. Im pretty sure we shouldnt expect there to be anymore emails on this going forward that will be easily discovered with a simple FOIA request. My guess is the WAC will be the final destination---but not until the WAC can demonstrate that their planned expansion is approved and ready to make the WAC stable.