(08-10-2018 03:58 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  I'm not sure if there's a tangible benefit to be had but it's definitely not being done for the benefit of all of G5. It's a calculated attempt to differentiate the AAC from the rest of the non-power conferences by an implied association with the power ones (at least casually). Which is fine, it's the conference's choice how to market itself, but the only way to get fans to buy in on the idea that there's not enough difference between the two levels to justify the oceanic gap in coverage and TV revenue is by beating them as much as possible, and that's something you can do no matter what you call yourself.

Bingo. Imagine where many of our schools would be if we had the additional $1.8+ million in annual TV payout AAC schools receive over ours...let alone if any of us had the $40 million payout bottom-of-the-barrel SEC schools get for doing very little to help their league.

(08-10-2018 01:24 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 12:11 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  They don't have a P6 argument to begin with, stopping at 9 wouldn't change that. They may be tops among all G5 conferences, but they're still considerably closer to the Sun Belt than they are to any P5 member.

I think the P6 branding is an attempt to keep the unfair playoff system from becoming permanently baked-in and challenging the misperception that G5 schools can't compete on the field with P5 schools.

I think it benefits all G5 schools. Most other G5 conferences don't seem to be actively challenging the P5 status quo narrative. I also don't think the other G5 conferences should be offended by the AAC doing it. The target is the P5 conferences, not the G5.

So if we all started putting P10 stickers on our helmets, the AAC would join us?

(08-10-2018 02:44 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 02:33 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 02:00 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 01:24 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 12:11 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  They don't have a P6 argument to begin with, stopping at 9 wouldn't change that. They may be tops among all G5 conferences, but they're still considerably closer to the Sun Belt than they are to any P5 member.

I think the P6 branding is an attempt to keep the unfair playoff system from becoming permanently baked-in and challenging the misperception that G5 schools can't compete on the field with P5 schools.

I think it benefits all G5 schools. Most other G5 conferences don't seem to be actively challenging the P5 status quo narrative. I also don't think the other G5 conferences should be offended by the AAC doing it. The target is the P5 conferences, not the G5.

That's all well and good, but it doesn't mean their argument is at all sound.

Again, the gap between the AAC and the P5 is larger than the gap between the AAC and the Sun Belt.

If there wasn't a gap there would be no reason to push it.

And you think putting a silly P6 sticker on helmet will change anything. First a decline in conference revenue and now a member school making pay cuts, it is clearly working.


It is all about money and the P5 schools aren’t sharing

The "decline" in conference revenue was virtually all due to the AAC grabbing the access bowl slot in 2015---but not getting the slot in the 2016-2017 year. Next year the reported AAC revenue will rise because the AAC again snagged the access bowl in 2017. Again, any increase in media deal wont kick in until fall of 2020. I believe Aresco has fully acknowledged time and time again that the current deal is not representative of the AAC's true media value in his opinion.

(08-10-2018 06:17 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 01:24 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 12:11 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  They don't have a P6 argument to begin with, stopping at 9 wouldn't change that. They may be tops among all G5 conferences, but they're still considerably closer to the Sun Belt than they are to any P5 member.

I think the P6 branding is an attempt to keep the unfair playoff system from becoming permanently baked-in and challenging the misperception that G5 schools can't compete on the field with P5 schools.

I think it benefits all G5 schools. Most other G5 conferences don't seem to be actively challenging the P5 status quo narrative. I also don't think the other G5 conferences should be offended by the AAC doing it. The target is the P5 conferences, not the G5.

So if we all started putting P10 stickers on our helmets, the AAC would join us?

Probably not...but it would be pretty funny.

(08-10-2018 04:38 PM)APPdiesel Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 03:58 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  I'm not sure if there's a tangible benefit to be had but it's definitely not being done for the benefit of all of G5. It's a calculated attempt to differentiate the AAC from the rest of the non-power conferences by an implied association with the power ones (at least casually). Which is fine, it's the conference's choice how to market itself, but the only way to get fans to buy in on the idea that there's not enough difference between the two levels to justify the oceanic gap in coverage and TV revenue is by beating them as much as possible, and that's something you can do no matter what you call yourself.

Bingo. Imagine where many of our schools would be if we had the additional $1.8+ million in annual TV payout AAC schools receive over ours...let alone if any of us had the $40 million payout bottom-of-the-barrel SEC schools get for doing very little to help their league.

clt says $1.8M would be appreciated at Charlotte, but not transformational.


Just wait until we are in the SEC.

(08-08-2018 03:21 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  Pay cuts at AAC school?

I thought they're on the verge of getting 400% raise with their new TV contract $8-10 million per school, Something doesn't souind right if a conference raise is just right around the corner.

What may happen later this year or first 1/2 of next year doesn't pay the bills now. I do believe AAC will get a large raise next year.. 5 to 8 mil per team. The fact the coaches, and AD were willing to take a hit this year may point to the upcoming deal.

This sounds like someone when on a shopping spree buying a bunch of expensive stuff on credit. Now that credit card bills arrived they have to go return some of those items because they can’t afford them. In the meantime they wait for the big raise the boss has been promising for years so they can do it all over again.

(08-10-2018 02:33 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 02:00 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 01:24 PM)cotton1991 Wrote:  

(08-10-2018 12:11 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  They don't have a P6 argument to begin with, stopping at 9 wouldn't change that. They may be tops among all G5 conferences, but they're still considerably closer to the Sun Belt than they are to any P5 member.

I think the P6 branding is an attempt to keep the unfair playoff system from becoming permanently baked-in and challenging the misperception that G5 schools can't compete on the field with P5 schools.

I think it benefits all G5 schools. Most other G5 conferences don't seem to be actively challenging the P5 status quo narrative. I also don't think the other G5 conferences should be offended by the AAC doing it. The target is the P5 conferences, not the G5.

That's all well and good, but it doesn't mean their argument is at all sound.

Again, the gap between the AAC and the P5 is larger than the gap between the AAC and the Sun Belt.

If there wasn't a gap there would be no reason to push it.

Five guys enter a bar, they are 7', 6'11", 6'9" 6'8" and 6'6".

Five more guys enter a bar, they are 5'8", 5'7" 5'6", 5'5" and 5'1".

The 5'8" man proudly exclaims "I am the 6th tallest man in this bar, I AM TALL!" the other four men he entered with have a good laugh, especially when the 5'8" man approaches the first group and tries to join their conversation and they don't hear or acknowledge any of his efforts to join them.

(08-10-2018 05:11 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  If they had stopped at 9 (not adding Tulane, East Carolina, or Tulsa), they may have had a stronger P6 argument.

Not even. If the MWC couldn't pull it off with BYU, Utah and TCU, no way was the AACk gonna do it. I mean look at Temple. Before they feasted on the MAC (The years they were in the MAC they never won a game with a MAC opt having a winning record) from 2009-2012 they didn't have a winning record in football for 25 years, 1984 was their last winning season and in that time they won 66 games or 2.6 games a year.

No way was/will the AACk ever be on the level of Texas, Oklahoma or even K-State or Iowa State. They can look at their lil marketing tool of P6 and brag all they want, while the rest of the country just laughs at them.

lol i find it funny that almost every one here has made this a conference thing , or as sign of the times thing

this is a tulsa issue, and tulsa alone ..all but about 5 to 7 college teams in all of college football rely on subsidizes from students ..tulsa is by far the smallest enrolled school in the fbs (not counting the military academies), who's enrollment is shrinking

tulsa's staff pay is still projected higher than most in c-usa... in a system reliant on students funds, a school with no students tried keep up with the joneses (the rest of the aac) before pulling back...

Rice isn't too much larger than Tulsa from an undergraduate perspective. Our endowment is about 6x so that helps.

Still, I can't hate because Tulsa is still paying their hoops coach more than us and their football coach is right about in the same range as us.

(08-11-2018 11:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  lol i find it funny that almost every one here has made this a conference thing , or as sign of the times thing

this is a tulsa issue, and tulsa alone ..all but about 5 to 7 college teams in all of college football rely on subsidizes from students ..tulsa is by far the smallest enrolled school in the fbs (not counting the military academies), who's enrollment is shrinking

tulsa's staff pay is still projected higher than most in c-usa... in a system reliant on students funds, a school with no students tried keep up with the joneses (the rest of the aac) before pulling back...

Lol, You can’t compare private schools with public schools. None of the elite private schools enrollment are growing immensely like public schools. The elite private schools are not design for massive growth like public colleges

Look at Wake Forest, Duke, Rice all very small like Tulsa compare to other FBS, none of them are cutting salaries and going through the public embarrassment.
It absolutely makes no sense if they think a 400 to 500% increase is right around the corner. They know the reasonable expectations of the new contract and are adjusting according and going through the public embarrassment now.

Once again Pesik puts out false information, remember he said CUSA 1 and 2 plays AAC 5 and 6 in Bowls. False, CUSA 2 beat AAC 2 in 2016

(08-11-2018 11:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  lol i find it funny that almost every one here has made this a conference thing , or as sign of the times thing

this is a tulsa issue, and tulsa alone ..all but about 5 to 7 college teams in all of college football rely on subsidizes from students ..tulsa is by far the smallest enrolled school in the fbs (not counting the military academies), who's enrollment is shrinking

tulsa's staff pay is still projected higher than most in c-usa... in a system reliant on students funds, a school with no students tried keep up with the joneses (the rest of the aac) before pulling back...

Dumb as a rock and doesn't even know it.....

(08-09-2018 11:16 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  The "P6" marketing is really working Aresco!

hey at least he's out there marketing the AAC, hyping the fact Houston and UCF have brought us Access Bowl victories.

I mean, Judy is out there rolling around in a toy Jeep while Aresco is doing his job.

he's supposed to be really good at negotiating TV deals so this upcoming TV contract will 'tell the tale' as far as I'm concerned.

that old BE money is about to run out and we need to capitalize on what we've done. (UConn winning men's/women's NCAA hoops titles along with Houston/UCF winning Access Bowls)

(08-12-2018 01:11 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-09-2018 11:16 AM)Dawgxas Wrote:  The "P6" marketing is really working Aresco!

hey at least he's out there marketing the AAC, hyping the fact Houston and UCF have brought us Access Bowl victories.

I mean, Judy is out there rolling around in a toy Jeep while Aresco is doing his job.

he's supposed to be really good at negotiating TV deals so this upcoming TV contract will 'tell the tale' as far as I'm concerned.

that old BE money is about to run out and we need to capitalize on what we've done. (UConn winning men's/women's NCAA hoops titles along with Houston/UCF winning Access Bowls)

Posting that pic is hitting below the belt.

(08-12-2018 01:11 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  that old BE money is about to run out and we need to capitalize on what we've done. (UConn winning men's/women's NCAA hoops titles along with Houston/UCF winning Access Bowls)

Jim Calhoun isn't walking through the door at UConn anytime soon and well Ollie did win with his recruits. Its the only time he has won. Hurley might be better than Ollie but I don't see him pulling the recruits Calhoun got. Calhoun got to pitch to his recruits playing WVU, Syracuse, BC, Georgetown, Providence and Nova. While Hurley gets to pitch Cincy, Houston, Memphis and Wichita State. But then kids also see schools like Tulane, ECU, USF.

(08-12-2018 02:09 PM)HerdZoned Wrote:  

(08-12-2018 01:11 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  that old BE money is about to run out and we need to capitalize on what we've done. (UConn winning men's/women's NCAA hoops titles along with Houston/UCF winning Access Bowls)

Jim Calhoun isn't walking through the door at UConn anytime soon and well Ollie did win with his recruits. Its the only time he has won. Hurley might be better than Ollie but I don't see him pulling the recruits Calhoun got. Calhoun got to pitch to his recruits playing WVU, Syracuse, BC, Georgetown, Providence and Nova. While Hurley gets to pitch Cincy, Houston, Memphis and Wichita State. But then kids also see schools like Tulane, ECU, USF.

I can honestly say as a Memphis fan it's a lot easier to get excited about playing UConn, Cincy, WSU, Temple, Houston, SMU, etc over trying to get excited about playing Southern Miss, UAB, UTEP, Rice, Marshall, etc

I don't mean that as an insult but it's the truth coming from CUSA.

(08-12-2018 02:54 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  I can honestly say as a Memphis fan it's a lot easier to get excited about playing UConn, Cincy, WSU, Temple, Houston, SMU, etc over trying to get excited about playing Southern Miss, UAB, UTEP, Rice, Marshall, etc

I don't mean that as an insult but it's the truth coming from CUSA.

Wow UofMemphis, did grapes highjack your account?

(08-11-2018 12:04 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Rice isn't too much larger than Tulsa from an undergraduate perspective. Our endowment is about 6x so that helps.

Still, I can't hate because Tulsa is still paying their hoops coach more than us and their football coach is right about in the same range as us.

Two things really stood out to me. First is the declining enrollment at Tulsa. That is never good. I had to look up the current Rice initiative to raise enrollment by 30%, because that is what is needed to stay competitive with our academic peers. The second is that Tulsa does not seem to have a wealthy donor (or group of donors) who can make this go away with a check. It is a puzzler.

(08-11-2018 12:04 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote:  Rice isn't too much larger than Tulsa from an undergraduate perspective. Our endowment is about 6x so that helps.

This had me curious, so I looked it up. In 2017, Rice reported a total enrollment of 7,022. This included 4,001 undergraduates (85 part time) and 3,021 graduate students (240 part time).

By comparison, Tulsa reported a total enrollment of 4,433, with 3,343 undergraduates and 1,090 graduate students (including the law school).