(07-18-2019 07:12 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  Where has the conference come compared to the other non-A5 conferences There is only so far that can be improved unless other changes happen, like a Big12-10 implosion, and that is not a guarantee. The pay itself is on the presidents of the conference. You surely have contacted yours if this is your opinion.

Like my university president is going to be concerned about an email on the athletic conference head’s salary. You have any other insightful suggestions?

I've seen repeatedly on this board comments stating the media contract is backloaded. Apart from message boards and some radio guys speculating we'll start around $3 million, no one in the know has ever said it is backloaded. In fact in an interview, our AD specifically said the payments are roughly equal with only variations for bowl payouts and other credits. I prefer to take the word of an administrator who deals with budgets.

If I am wrong, please provide a link to a credible source.

(07-17-2019 10:56 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 07:44 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 07:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-16-2019 06:10 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  Folks do not understand the time value of money. From a valuation POV this is not a $7mm per year contract. Aresco is not being honest with this deal.
What value add has Aresco given this conference? It is a very important question.

The same is true of every deal your comparing it to as well.

Not really cause this deal starts out way less than $7mm and climbs up each year. It is a total lie saying it is $7mm per. Hell by the time it gets to $7mm a quarter of our teams could be playing in the new B12. Just Aresco putting lipstick on a pig to justify his bloated salary.

Lol. It’s not a lie. It’s an average. You think represented the value of our deal using the average is somehow unique in that aspect? It starts at around 5.5 million and ends at about 8.5 million. On average it will be 7 million a year—that’s where the figure comes from. I’m perplexed as to why you don’t understand that EVERY single deal your comparing ours to is calculated based on an average as well. Their deals all do the same thing—-including our current 2013 deal that we are in the last year of.

Says who? I can't find one single source to corroborate that pay structure, and Tom Bowen told me flat out to my face that the deal was not going to be graduated, but exactly $7M per year per team. Now I don't know if that changes now that YouKon has left, but what do know FOR SURE???

ETA: I don't think THEY (the admins, Aresco, and ESPN) even know. I think they still are negotiating the exact terms.

(07-20-2019 02:14 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 07:12 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  Where has the conference come compared to the other non-A5 conferences There is only so far that can be improved unless other changes happen, like a Big12-10 implosion, and that is not a guarantee. The pay itself is on the presidents of the conference. You surely have contacted yours if this is your opinion.

Like my university president is going to be concerned about an email on the athletic conference head’s salary. You have any other insightful suggestions?

The presidents do not vote on Aresco's salary? Is that not one of the points being criticized in this thread.

(07-18-2019 07:00 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  The question is not about being fired it is about ROI. The man makes as much as the SEC commish. Anyone who thinks that is reasonable has issues.

I’m pretty sure the question was definitely about being fired. Specifically, the “should Mike Aresco be fired” part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(07-20-2019 08:13 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:14 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 07:12 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  Where has the conference come compared to the other non-A5 conferences There is only so far that can be improved unless other changes happen, like a Big12-10 implosion, and that is not a guarantee. The pay itself is on the presidents of the conference. You surely have contacted yours if this is your opinion.

Like my university president is going to be concerned about an email on the athletic conference head’s salary. You have any other insightful suggestions?

The presidents do not vote on Aresco's salary? Is that not one of the points being criticized in this thread.

What?

(07-20-2019 10:11 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 07:00 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  The question is not about being fired it is about ROI. The man makes as much as the SEC commish. Anyone who thinks that is reasonable has issues.

I’m pretty sure the question was definitely about being fired. Specifically, the “should Mike Aresco be fired” part.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

K. He should not be fired.

Lol. You're divisiveness shall be your undoing.

Stay.the.course.

You're on to something.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(07-20-2019 03:35 PM)mikeinoki Wrote:  I've seen repeatedly on this board comments stating the media contract is backloaded. Apart from message boards and some radio guys speculating we'll start around $3 million, no one in the know has ever said it is backloaded. In fact in an interview, our AD specifically said the payments are roughly equal with only variations for bowl payouts and other credits. I prefer to take the word of an administrator who deals with budgets.

If I am wrong, please provide a link to a credible source.

I agree with you. Haven’t seen anything either since the deal went public. There was one article I read several weeks prior to the media deal completion that speculated that it was backloaded. I don’t have that article available, but if I can find it, I will link it.
This thread has kind of bugged me from the beginning. How can anyone make presumptions or assumptions about whether or not the media deal was a bad deal or not by just scratching the surface and gleaming over the numbers. There were days/weeks of negotiations between parties to come up with this deal. There were so many factors and variables that had to be considered way beyond the scope of just numbers. You can’t sit back and draw conclusions about something without all the facts in front of you. If the presidents are pleased as a whole than the deal must be a fair or good deal in my opinion. He should not be fired. The conference is in a great place and is continuing to get better.

(07-21-2019 09:42 AM)NoQuarterBrigade Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 03:35 PM)mikeinoki Wrote:  I've seen repeatedly on this board comments stating the media contract is backloaded. Apart from message boards and some radio guys speculating we'll start around $3 million, no one in the know has ever said it is backloaded. In fact in an interview, our AD specifically said the payments are roughly equal with only variations for bowl payouts and other credits. I prefer to take the word of an administrator who deals with budgets.

If I am wrong, please provide a link to a credible source.

I agree with you. Haven’t seen anything either since the deal went public. There was one article I read several weeks prior to the media deal completion that speculated that it was backloaded. I don’t have that article available, but if I can find it, I will link it.
This thread has kind of bugged me from the beginning. How can anyone make presumptions or assumptions about whether or not the media deal was a bad deal or not by just scratching the surface and gleaming over the numbers. There were days/weeks of negotiations between parties to come up with this deal. There were so many factors and variables that had to be considered way beyond the scope of just numbers. You can’t sit back and draw conclusions about something without all the facts in front of you. If the presidents are pleased as a whole than the deal must be a fair or good deal in my opinion. He should not be fired. The conference is in a great place and is continuing to get better.

Because it's a message board, lol.

I agree, we really don't have enough info to conclude much of anything, beyond the almost $7M average over the life of a 12 year contract.

(07-21-2019 11:57 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 09:42 AM)NoQuarterBrigade Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 03:35 PM)mikeinoki Wrote:  I've seen repeatedly on this board comments stating the media contract is backloaded. Apart from message boards and some radio guys speculating we'll start around $3 million, no one in the know has ever said it is backloaded. In fact in an interview, our AD specifically said the payments are roughly equal with only variations for bowl payouts and other credits. I prefer to take the word of an administrator who deals with budgets.

If I am wrong, please provide a link to a credible source.

I agree with you. Haven’t seen anything either since the deal went public. There was one article I read several weeks prior to the media deal completion that speculated that it was backloaded. I don’t have that article available, but if I can find it, I will link it.
This thread has kind of bugged me from the beginning. How can anyone make presumptions or assumptions about whether or not the media deal was a bad deal or not by just scratching the surface and gleaming over the numbers. There were days/weeks of negotiations between parties to come up with this deal. There were so many factors and variables that had to be considered way beyond the scope of just numbers. You can’t sit back and draw conclusions about something without all the facts in front of you. If the presidents are pleased as a whole than the deal must be a fair or good deal in my opinion. He should not be fired. The conference is in a great place and is continuing to get better.

Because it's a message board, lol.

I agree, we really don't have enough info to conclude much of anything, beyond the almost $7M average over the life of a 12 year contract.

I know. I get it. It’s just opinions/discussion. Fair enough.
As for Aresco, I really think he has done a lot more good than harm for the conference. Is he paid too much? I don’t know. I will have to gleam over the numbers and form an opinion.

(07-21-2019 01:37 PM)NoQuarterBrigade Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 11:57 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 09:42 AM)NoQuarterBrigade Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 03:35 PM)mikeinoki Wrote:  I've seen repeatedly on this board comments stating the media contract is backloaded. Apart from message boards and some radio guys speculating we'll start around $3 million, no one in the know has ever said it is backloaded. In fact in an interview, our AD specifically said the payments are roughly equal with only variations for bowl payouts and other credits. I prefer to take the word of an administrator who deals with budgets.

If I am wrong, please provide a link to a credible source.

I agree with you. Haven’t seen anything either since the deal went public. There was one article I read several weeks prior to the media deal completion that speculated that it was backloaded. I don’t have that article available, but if I can find it, I will link it.
This thread has kind of bugged me from the beginning. How can anyone make presumptions or assumptions about whether or not the media deal was a bad deal or not by just scratching the surface and gleaming over the numbers. There were days/weeks of negotiations between parties to come up with this deal. There were so many factors and variables that had to be considered way beyond the scope of just numbers. You can’t sit back and draw conclusions about something without all the facts in front of you. If the presidents are pleased as a whole than the deal must be a fair or good deal in my opinion. He should not be fired. The conference is in a great place and is continuing to get better.

Because it's a message board, lol.

I agree, we really don't have enough info to conclude much of anything, beyond the almost $7M average over the life of a 12 year contract.

I know. I get it. It’s just opinions/discussion. Fair enough.
As for Aresco, I really think he has done a lot more good than harm for the conference. Is he paid too much? I don’t know. I will have to gleam over the numbers and form an opinion.

Has been terrible or done a bad job? No.

Has he been spectacular or done something incredible? No.

Is he worth 1.8m in salary? No.

Where you go with these facts can vary widely. To some extent his good and bad decisions are limited strongly by the presidents, who see things differently than an AD or commisioner will, and different than fans do. The opinions change depending on how you feel about these questions.

Could we get Aresco for less than 1.8m?

Is there a better option than Aresco?

Is there an equal option for Aresco, but available for less?

Has Aresco made the best use of the leverage he had available?

Is any change made worth the cost of the change? Loss of stability, current moves and direction losing momentum, change in conference dynamics, etc.

ill say this...everyone who wants aresco fired are people who are mad he isnt a magician, or dont realize what our situation

- people are mad he didn't get us a 10-12mil+ deal, in this climate, in a non p5, in a league where no one wants to sign a GOR

-mad we did a 12+ year deal..ignoring every major tv contract with any real money is 10+ years...conference with sub 10 year deal are the penny deals from the g4

- mad we arent getting 8 p5 bowl lineups even though we only average 7 bowl teams a year....acting like us and not he p5 have the leverage there


im going to make a bold statement: with the context that big money only entered "conference athletics" in the mid 90s before that is was individual schools. (thus an easier job)

i think aresco is the 3rd best conference commissioner in the history of college athletics
after jim delany (big 10) and Dave Gavitt (big east)

gavitt turned a league of small private schools in arguably the best basketball league in the country
delany made the big 10 the most powerful richest conference in the nation..and the big 10 wasnt good in basketball or football when he was raising their profile

aresco has made some mistakes along the way but so have these guys...gavitt passed on penn state, and delany invited rutgers

i dont think any other commissioner besides them has done more with less, not even adding the turmoil he came into (everyone wanted to leave before he ever came)..and unlike the other 2 he has room grow as he still has big aspirations

i dotn think anyone realizes how worse we could have ended up
look at c-usa being "innovative" in the conference tourney

(07-21-2019 08:37 AM)panama Wrote:  Lol. You're divisiveness shall be your undoing.

Stay.the.course.

You're on to something.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I'd say a ~70% approval rating is pretty damn solid...esp when you consider fans from other conferences are probably stacking the 'yes' vote.

(07-21-2019 03:40 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 08:37 AM)panama Wrote:  Lol. You're divisiveness shall be your undoing.

Stay.the.course.

You're on to something.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I'd say a ~70% approval rating is pretty damn solid...esp when you consider fans from other conferences are probably stacking the 'yes' vote.

And won’t leave our board

You guys do recall Mike Tranghese and that frickin' Marinotto, right? lol

(07-21-2019 04:12 PM)TripleA Wrote:  You guys do recall Mike Tranghese and that frickin' Marinotto, right? lol

Tranghese was okay.

Marinotto, aka Meatball, was a chimp...

(07-21-2019 04:19 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 04:12 PM)TripleA Wrote:  You guys do recall Mike Tranghese and that frickin' Marinotto, right? lol

Tranghese was okay.

Marinotto, aka Meatball, was a chimp...

Menu planned

Meatballs for dinner

(07-21-2019 03:52 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 03:40 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(07-21-2019 08:37 AM)panama Wrote:  Lol. You're divisiveness shall be your undoing.

Stay.the.course.

You're on to something.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I'd say a ~70% approval rating is pretty damn solid...esp when you consider fans from other conferences are probably stacking the 'yes' vote.

And won’t leave our board

Relax

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(07-20-2019 10:17 PM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 08:13 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(07-20-2019 02:14 AM)wavefan12 Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 07:12 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  Where has the conference come compared to the other non-A5 conferences There is only so far that can be improved unless other changes happen, like a Big12-10 implosion, and that is not a guarantee. The pay itself is on the presidents of the conference. You surely have contacted yours if this is your opinion.

Like my university president is going to be concerned about an email on the athletic conference head’s salary. You have any other insightful suggestions?

The presidents do not vote on Aresco's salary? Is that not one of the points being criticized in this thread.

What?

Reread the post and apologize for my confusion of my last post.