(01-26-2021 01:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When asked about the CBS story on the Boise emails, Aresco smiled ... and said--

"I suspected that might come up. As you know, there is very little I can say about any specific situation. I really cant comment on that. But I can tell you this---we're at 11 now and we would like to be at 12. I've made no secret of that. We enjoyed having divisional play. We liked it. We had a successful season. We had our two top teams ultimately play in our championship with 11 teams, but scheduling 11 teams is not easy. It creates a lot of scheduling difficulties. We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like." ...

He then goes on to talk about the importance of those Thursday/Friday games and how we cant do it as much with 11 and how strategically we need to play those games more than the Big-12 or Big-10 might need to.

He also mentions that as the season unfolded, everyone was still thinking in terms of teams having a good shot at (winning their) division--despite the fact there were no divisions.

...He then says

"We would look at reasonable expansion opportunities now, we have heard going up to 14 down the road.....we have to be as Jim Delaney once said, you know, you have to be alert--you have to be alert to the possibilities. Down the road would I expect us to get back to 12? Possibly. Its possible. But right now nothing is happening."

https://twitter.com/WHIP_Sports/status/1352633110609891333

The realignment question in the "Around The American" video is around the 46:22 mark.

Even though Aresco's main point is that "nothing is happening" right now, he also noted that he really isn't free to talk about any of these things in any detail, which suggests that there may be a lot of interesting details that he can't talk about.

Aresco is well known for playing the cards extremely close to the vest. Hardly anyone heard a word about Wichita State joining the AAC until the news was announced. So, when he says that "it's possible" "down the road," that could mean anything ranging from '(even though there's nothing happening right now at this moment), there are schools that might possibly join in a year or two and might be in contact with us' to 'nothing means "absolutely nothing," and no prospects of anything developing.'

The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes, but his unequivocal, emphatic tone suggests that the conference would prefer to get back to 12 sooner, rather than later, and for that reason, it may be possible that "nothing happening right now" is a bit of an overstatement.

.

But what's most telling about Aresco's remarks are:

1) The fact that he made the strongest statement ever, since Connecticut's departure, indicating that the AAC not only wants to be back "at 12," but providing four separate reasons why the conference wants to replace Connecticut:

--a) "We enjoyed divisional play."

--b) "scheduling 11 teams...creates a lot of scheduling difficulties."

--c) "We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like."

--d) One of the disadvantages of not having divisional play is that, as the season wore on, a lot of AAC fans were thinking about how their teams could have won their divisions, but they missed out on that feature of divisional play.

From the emphatic and unequivocal tone of these comments, Aresco's words suggest that the conference feels very strongly about wanting to replace Connecticut, and would prefer to be making continuing progress in that direction.

2) For perhaps the first time, Aresco mentioned the possibility of a full-fledged expansion beyond 12 teams, and acknowledged that the idea of expanding to 14 has at least been heard or suggested as a "reasonable" possibility.

.

Thus, while his words suggest that the possibility of adding Boise State (or SDSU) may be over for now, on indefinite hold, or (as he put it in a slightly earlier interview) "on the back burner"...

We have thus, it seems, learned something new:

The AAC is, for a number of different reasons, very strongly inclined and motivated to "get back to 12" and is likely to consider the idea of an eventual expansion to 14 to be at least "reasonable" [/color] and worthy of consideration, whether or not it is likely to occur within the foreseeable future. In fact, he went further than noting that the idea has been mentioned (i.e., "heard"), when he proceeded to state that ..."you have to be alert to the possibilities" (an imperative declaration).

His mention of not being able to provide ESPN with enough of the Thursday and Friday product suggests that there is some urgency having something to do with the AAC's partnership with ESPN. This might suggest the possibility that ESPN is actively encouraging the AAC to get back to 12 so that the network will have more content to provide on Thursdays and Fridays.

(01-26-2021 04:09 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When asked about the CBS story on the Boise emails, Aresco smiled ... and said--

"I suspected that might come up. As you know, there is very little I can say about any specific situation. I really cant comment on that. But I can tell you this---we're at 11 now and we would like to be at 12. I've made no secret of that. We enjoyed having divisional play. We liked it. We had a successful season. We had our two top teams ultimately play in our championship with 11 teams, but scheduling 11 teams is not easy. It creates a lot of scheduling difficulties. We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like." ...

He then goes on to talk about the importance of those Thursday/Friday games and how we cant do it as much with 11 and how strategically we need to play those games more than the Big-12 or Big-10 might need to.

He also mentions that as the season unfolded, everyone was still thinking in terms of teams having a good shot at (winning their) division--despite the fact there were no divisions.

...He then says

"We would look at reasonable expansion opportunities now, we have heard going up to 14 down the road.....we have to be as Jim Delaney once said, you know, you have to be alert--you have to be alert to the possibilities. Down the road would I expect us to get back to 12? Possibly. Its possible. But right now nothing is happening."

https://twitter.com/WHIP_Sports/status/1352633110609891333

The realignment question in the "Around The American" video is around the 46:22 mark.

Even though Aresco's main point is that "nothing is happening" right now, he also noted that he really isn't free to talk about any of these things in any detail, which suggests that there may be a lot of interesting details that he can't talk about.

Aresco is well known for playing the cards extremely close to the vest. Hardly anyone heard a word about Wichita State joining the AAC until the news was announced. So, when he says that "it's possible" "down the road," that could mean anything ranging from '(even though there's nothing happening right now at this moment), there are schools that might possibly join in a year or two and might be in contact with us' to 'nothing means "absolutely nothing," and no prospects of anything developing.'

The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes, but his unequivocal, emphatic tone suggests that the conference would prefer to get back to 12 sooner, rather than later, and for that reason, it may be possible that "nothing happening right now" is a bit of an overstatement.

.

But what's most telling about Aresco's remarks are:

1) The fact that he made the strongest statement ever, since Connecticut's departure, indicating that the AAC not only wants to be back "at 12," but providing four separate reasons why the conference wants to replace Connecticut:

--a) "We enjoyed divisional play."

--b) "scheduling 11 teams...creates a lot of scheduling difficulties."

--c) "We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like."

--d) One of the disadvantages of not having divisional play is that, as the season wore on, a lot of AAC fans were thinking about how their teams could have won their divisions, but they missed out on that feature of divisional play.

From the emphatic and unequivocal tone of these comments, Aresco's words suggest that the conference feels very strongly about wanting to replace Connecticut, and would prefer to be making continuing progress in that direction.

2) For perhaps the first time, Aresco mentioned the possibility of a full-fledged expansion beyond 12 teams, and acknowledged that the idea of expanding to 14 has at least been heard or suggested as a "reasonable" possibility.

.

Thus, while his words suggest that the possibility of adding Boise State (or SDSU) may be over for now, on indefinite hold, or (as he put it in a slightly earlier interview) "on the back burner"...

We have thus, it seems, learned something new:

The AAC is, for a number of different reasons, very strongly inclined and motivated to "get back to 12" and is likely to consider the idea of an eventual expansion to 14 to be at least "reasonable" [/color] and worthy of consideration, whether or not it is likely to occur within the foreseeable future. In fact, he went further than noting that the idea has been mentioned (i.e., "heard"), when he proceeded to state that ..."you have to be alert to the possibilities" (an imperative declaration).

His mention of not being able to provide ESPN with enough of the Thursday and Friday product suggests that there is some urgency having something to do with the AAC's partnership with ESPN. This might suggest the possibility that ESPN is actively encouraging the AAC to get back to 12 so that the network will have more content to provide on Thursdays and Fridays.

Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

(01-26-2021 06:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 04:09 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When asked about the CBS story on the Boise emails, Aresco smiled ... and said--

"I suspected that might come up. As you know, there is very little I can say about any specific situation. I really cant comment on that. But I can tell you this---we're at 11 now and we would like to be at 12. I've made no secret of that. We enjoyed having divisional play. We liked it. We had a successful season. We had our two top teams ultimately play in our championship with 11 teams, but scheduling 11 teams is not easy. It creates a lot of scheduling difficulties. We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like." ...

He then goes on to talk about the importance of those Thursday/Friday games and how we cant do it as much with 11 and how strategically we need to play those games more than the Big-12 or Big-10 might need to.

He also mentions that as the season unfolded, everyone was still thinking in terms of teams having a good shot at (winning their) division--despite the fact there were no divisions.

...He then says

"We would look at reasonable expansion opportunities now, we have heard going up to 14 down the road.....we have to be as Jim Delaney once said, you know, you have to be alert--you have to be alert to the possibilities. Down the road would I expect us to get back to 12? Possibly. Its possible. But right now nothing is happening."

https://twitter.com/WHIP_Sports/status/1352633110609891333

The realignment question in the "Around The American" video is around the 46:22 mark.

Even though Aresco's main point is that "nothing is happening" right now, he also noted that he really isn't free to talk about any of these things in any detail, which suggests that there may be a lot of interesting details that he can't talk about.

Aresco is well known for playing the cards extremely close to the vest. Hardly anyone heard a word about Wichita State joining the AAC until the news was announced. So, when he says that "it's possible" "down the road," that could mean anything ranging from '(even though there's nothing happening right now at this moment), there are schools that might possibly join in a year or two and might be in contact with us' to 'nothing means "absolutely nothing," and no prospects of anything developing.'

The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes, but his unequivocal, emphatic tone suggests that the conference would prefer to get back to 12 sooner, rather than later, and for that reason, it may be possible that "nothing happening right now" is a bit of an overstatement.

.

But what's most telling about Aresco's remarks are:

1) The fact that he made the strongest statement ever, since Connecticut's departure, indicating that the AAC not only wants to be back "at 12," but providing four separate reasons why the conference wants to replace Connecticut:

--a) "We enjoyed divisional play."

--b) "scheduling 11 teams...creates a lot of scheduling difficulties."

--c) "We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like."

--d) One of the disadvantages of not having divisional play is that, as the season wore on, a lot of AAC fans were thinking about how their teams could have won their divisions, but they missed out on that feature of divisional play.

From the emphatic and unequivocal tone of these comments, Aresco's words suggest that the conference feels very strongly about wanting to replace Connecticut, and would prefer to be making continuing progress in that direction.

2) For perhaps the first time, Aresco mentioned the possibility of a full-fledged expansion beyond 12 teams, and acknowledged that the idea of expanding to 14 has at least been heard or suggested as a "reasonable" possibility.

.

Thus, while his words suggest that the possibility of adding Boise State (or SDSU) may be over for now, on indefinite hold, or (as he put it in a slightly earlier interview) "on the back burner"...

We have thus, it seems, learned something new:

The AAC is, for a number of different reasons, very strongly inclined and motivated to "get back to 12" and is likely to consider the idea of an eventual expansion to 14 to be at least "reasonable" [/color] and worthy of consideration, whether or not it is likely to occur within the foreseeable future. In fact, he went further than noting that the idea has been mentioned (i.e., "heard"), when he proceeded to state that ..."you have to be alert to the possibilities" (an imperative declaration).

His mention of not being able to provide ESPN with enough of the Thursday and Friday product suggests that there is some urgency having something to do with the AAC's partnership with ESPN. This might suggest the possibility that ESPN is actively encouraging the AAC to get back to 12 so that the network will have more content to provide on Thursdays and Fridays.

Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

Correct. Expansion to 14 suggests a couple of things. One, it suggests a move to west, as there isn’t one program in the east other than Army that really warrants inclusion—much less 3. It also suggests that ESPN is on board with extra money—otherwise going to 14 substantially dilutes per team earnings. Adding western teams that could represent additional late night starts throughout the season is the only reason I can see ESPN being willing to ante up an additional 14 million a year for AAC expansion to 14.

(01-26-2021 06:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 04:09 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When asked about the CBS story on the Boise emails, Aresco smiled ... and said--

"I suspected that might come up. As you know, there is very little I can say about any specific situation. I really cant comment on that. But I can tell you this---we're at 11 now and we would like to be at 12. I've made no secret of that. We enjoyed having divisional play. We liked it. We had a successful season. We had our two top teams ultimately play in our championship with 11 teams, but scheduling 11 teams is not easy. It creates a lot of scheduling difficulties. We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like." ...

He then goes on to talk about the importance of those Thursday/Friday games and how we cant do it as much with 11 and how strategically we need to play those games more than the Big-12 or Big-10 might need to.

He also mentions that as the season unfolded, everyone was still thinking in terms of teams having a good shot at (winning their) division--despite the fact there were no divisions.

...He then says

"We would look at reasonable expansion opportunities now, we have heard going up to 14 down the road.....we have to be as Jim Delaney once said, you know, you have to be alert--you have to be alert to the possibilities. Down the road would I expect us to get back to 12? Possibly. Its possible. But right now nothing is happening."

https://twitter.com/WHIP_Sports/status/1352633110609891333

The realignment question in the "Around The American" video is around the 46:22 mark.

Even though Aresco's main point is that "nothing is happening" right now, he also noted that he really isn't free to talk about any of these things in any detail, which suggests that there may be a lot of interesting details that he can't talk about.

Aresco is well known for playing the cards extremely close to the vest. Hardly anyone heard a word about Wichita State joining the AAC until the news was announced. So, when he says that "it's possible" "down the road," that could mean anything ranging from '(even though there's nothing happening right now at this moment), there are schools that might possibly join in a year or two and might be in contact with us' to 'nothing means "absolutely nothing," and no prospects of anything developing.'

The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes, but his unequivocal, emphatic tone suggests that the conference would prefer to get back to 12 sooner, rather than later, and for that reason, it may be possible that "nothing happening right now" is a bit of an overstatement.

.

But what's most telling about Aresco's remarks are:

1) The fact that he made the strongest statement ever, since Connecticut's departure, indicating that the AAC not only wants to be back "at 12," but providing four separate reasons why the conference wants to replace Connecticut:

--a) "We enjoyed divisional play."

--b) "scheduling 11 teams...creates a lot of scheduling difficulties."

--c) "We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like."

--d) One of the disadvantages of not having divisional play is that, as the season wore on, a lot of AAC fans were thinking about how their teams could have won their divisions, but they missed out on that feature of divisional play.

From the emphatic and unequivocal tone of these comments, Aresco's words suggest that the conference feels very strongly about wanting to replace Connecticut, and would prefer to be making continuing progress in that direction.

2) For perhaps the first time, Aresco mentioned the possibility of a full-fledged expansion beyond 12 teams, and acknowledged that the idea of expanding to 14 has at least been heard or suggested as a "reasonable" possibility.

.

Thus, while his words suggest that the possibility of adding Boise State (or SDSU) may be over for now, on indefinite hold, or (as he put it in a slightly earlier interview) "on the back burner"...

We have thus, it seems, learned something new:

The AAC is, for a number of different reasons, very strongly inclined and motivated to "get back to 12" and is likely to consider the idea of an eventual expansion to 14 to be at least "reasonable" [/color] and worthy of consideration, whether or not it is likely to occur within the foreseeable future. In fact, he went further than noting that the idea has been mentioned (i.e., "heard"), when he proceeded to state that ..."you have to be alert to the possibilities" (an imperative declaration).

His mention of not being able to provide ESPN with enough of the Thursday and Friday product suggests that there is some urgency having something to do with the AAC's partnership with ESPN. This might suggest the possibility that ESPN is actively encouraging the AAC to get back to 12 so that the network will have more content to provide on Thursdays and Fridays.

Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

The mention of 14 schools is new. The tone and empathic declaration of the benefits of going to 12 schools is new.

After reading the tea leaves, something is stirring (IMHO).

(01-26-2021 09:53 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 04:09 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When asked about the CBS story on the Boise emails, Aresco smiled ... and said--

"I suspected that might come up. As you know, there is very little I can say about any specific situation. I really cant comment on that. But I can tell you this---we're at 11 now and we would like to be at 12. I've made no secret of that. We enjoyed having divisional play. We liked it. We had a successful season. We had our two top teams ultimately play in our championship with 11 teams, but scheduling 11 teams is not easy. It creates a lot of scheduling difficulties. We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like." ...

He then goes on to talk about the importance of those Thursday/Friday games and how we cant do it as much with 11 and how strategically we need to play those games more than the Big-12 or Big-10 might need to.

He also mentions that as the season unfolded, everyone was still thinking in terms of teams having a good shot at (winning their) division--despite the fact there were no divisions.

...He then says

"We would look at reasonable expansion opportunities now, we have heard going up to 14 down the road.....we have to be as Jim Delaney once said, you know, you have to be alert--you have to be alert to the possibilities. Down the road would I expect us to get back to 12? Possibly. Its possible. But right now nothing is happening."

https://twitter.com/WHIP_Sports/status/1352633110609891333

The realignment question in the "Around The American" video is around the 46:22 mark.

Even though Aresco's main point is that "nothing is happening" right now, he also noted that he really isn't free to talk about any of these things in any detail, which suggests that there may be a lot of interesting details that he can't talk about.

Aresco is well known for playing the cards extremely close to the vest. Hardly anyone heard a word about Wichita State joining the AAC until the news was announced. So, when he says that "it's possible" "down the road," that could mean anything ranging from '(even though there's nothing happening right now at this moment), there are schools that might possibly join in a year or two and might be in contact with us' to 'nothing means "absolutely nothing," and no prospects of anything developing.'

The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes, but his unequivocal, emphatic tone suggests that the conference would prefer to get back to 12 sooner, rather than later, and for that reason, it may be possible that "nothing happening right now" is a bit of an overstatement.

.

But what's most telling about Aresco's remarks are:

1) The fact that he made the strongest statement ever, since Connecticut's departure, indicating that the AAC not only wants to be back "at 12," but providing four separate reasons why the conference wants to replace Connecticut:

--a) "We enjoyed divisional play."

--b) "scheduling 11 teams...creates a lot of scheduling difficulties."

--c) "We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like."

--d) One of the disadvantages of not having divisional play is that, as the season wore on, a lot of AAC fans were thinking about how their teams could have won their divisions, but they missed out on that feature of divisional play.

From the emphatic and unequivocal tone of these comments, Aresco's words suggest that the conference feels very strongly about wanting to replace Connecticut, and would prefer to be making continuing progress in that direction.

2) For perhaps the first time, Aresco mentioned the possibility of a full-fledged expansion beyond 12 teams, and acknowledged that the idea of expanding to 14 has at least been heard or suggested as a "reasonable" possibility.

.

Thus, while his words suggest that the possibility of adding Boise State (or SDSU) may be over for now, on indefinite hold, or (as he put it in a slightly earlier interview) "on the back burner"...

We have thus, it seems, learned something new:

The AAC is, for a number of different reasons, very strongly inclined and motivated to "get back to 12" and is likely to consider the idea of an eventual expansion to 14 to be at least "reasonable" [/color] and worthy of consideration, whether or not it is likely to occur within the foreseeable future. In fact, he went further than noting that the idea has been mentioned (i.e., "heard"), when he proceeded to state that ..."you have to be alert to the possibilities" (an imperative declaration).

His mention of not being able to provide ESPN with enough of the Thursday and Friday product suggests that there is some urgency having something to do with the AAC's partnership with ESPN. This might suggest the possibility that ESPN is actively encouraging the AAC to get back to 12 so that the network will have more content to provide on Thursdays and Fridays.

Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

I would disagree and have said so previously. The presidents are capable of having multiple preferences at the same time. These prefrences are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary. It can be true that the presidents prefer 12 and---at the same time---also prefer 11 to adding a team that reduces value or reduces the overall quality/perception of the league. In fact---it would be quite reasonable for both statements to likely be true of the presidents position on replacing UConn.

Look--leagues very rarely get the opportunity to replace their worst football program. This is a incredible opportunity to improve the league that must not be squandered.

(01-26-2021 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 09:53 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 04:09 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  When asked about the CBS story on the Boise emails, Aresco smiled ... and said--

"I suspected that might come up. As you know, there is very little I can say about any specific situation. I really cant comment on that. But I can tell you this---we're at 11 now and we would like to be at 12. I've made no secret of that. We enjoyed having divisional play. We liked it. We had a successful season. We had our two top teams ultimately play in our championship with 11 teams, but scheduling 11 teams is not easy. It creates a lot of scheduling difficulties. We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like." ...

He then goes on to talk about the importance of those Thursday/Friday games and how we cant do it as much with 11 and how strategically we need to play those games more than the Big-12 or Big-10 might need to.

He also mentions that as the season unfolded, everyone was still thinking in terms of teams having a good shot at (winning their) division--despite the fact there were no divisions.

...He then says

"We would look at reasonable expansion opportunities now, we have heard going up to 14 down the road.....we have to be as Jim Delaney once said, you know, you have to be alert--you have to be alert to the possibilities. Down the road would I expect us to get back to 12? Possibly. Its possible. But right now nothing is happening."

https://twitter.com/WHIP_Sports/status/1352633110609891333

The realignment question in the "Around The American" video is around the 46:22 mark.

Even though Aresco's main point is that "nothing is happening" right now, he also noted that he really isn't free to talk about any of these things in any detail, which suggests that there may be a lot of interesting details that he can't talk about.

Aresco is well known for playing the cards extremely close to the vest. Hardly anyone heard a word about Wichita State joining the AAC until the news was announced. So, when he says that "it's possible" "down the road," that could mean anything ranging from '(even though there's nothing happening right now at this moment), there are schools that might possibly join in a year or two and might be in contact with us' to 'nothing means "absolutely nothing," and no prospects of anything developing.'

The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes, but his unequivocal, emphatic tone suggests that the conference would prefer to get back to 12 sooner, rather than later, and for that reason, it may be possible that "nothing happening right now" is a bit of an overstatement.

.

But what's most telling about Aresco's remarks are:

1) The fact that he made the strongest statement ever, since Connecticut's departure, indicating that the AAC not only wants to be back "at 12," but providing four separate reasons why the conference wants to replace Connecticut:

--a) "We enjoyed divisional play."

--b) "scheduling 11 teams...creates a lot of scheduling difficulties."

--c) "We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like."

--d) One of the disadvantages of not having divisional play is that, as the season wore on, a lot of AAC fans were thinking about how their teams could have won their divisions, but they missed out on that feature of divisional play.

From the emphatic and unequivocal tone of these comments, Aresco's words suggest that the conference feels very strongly about wanting to replace Connecticut, and would prefer to be making continuing progress in that direction.

2) For perhaps the first time, Aresco mentioned the possibility of a full-fledged expansion beyond 12 teams, and acknowledged that the idea of expanding to 14 has at least been heard or suggested as a "reasonable" possibility.

.

Thus, while his words suggest that the possibility of adding Boise State (or SDSU) may be over for now, on indefinite hold, or (as he put it in a slightly earlier interview) "on the back burner"...

We have thus, it seems, learned something new:

The AAC is, for a number of different reasons, very strongly inclined and motivated to "get back to 12" and is likely to consider the idea of an eventual expansion to 14 to be at least "reasonable" [/color] and worthy of consideration, whether or not it is likely to occur within the foreseeable future. In fact, he went further than noting that the idea has been mentioned (i.e., "heard"), when he proceeded to state that ..."you have to be alert to the possibilities" (an imperative declaration).

His mention of not being able to provide ESPN with enough of the Thursday and Friday product suggests that there is some urgency having something to do with the AAC's partnership with ESPN. This might suggest the possibility that ESPN is actively encouraging the AAC to get back to 12 so that the network will have more content to provide on Thursdays and Fridays.

Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

I would disagree and have said so previously. The presidents are capable of having multiple preferences at the same time. These prefrences are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary. It can be true that the presidents prefer 12 and---at the same time---also prefer 11 to adding a team that reduces value or reduces the overall quality/perception of the league. In fact---it would be quite reasonable for both statements to likely be true of the presidents position on replacing UConn.

Look--leagues very rarely get the opportunity to replace their worst football program . This is a incredible opportunity to improve the league that must not be squandered.

The TONE from Aresco has always been we would prefer divisions BUT we would stand pat at eleven rather than add a program dilutive to the conference brand.

November 2019 podcast with Dan Tortora.
At the 7:22 mark Tortora says "I personally don't want to see divisions go away...right now I'm really enjoying personally and professionally seeing the East and the West battle each other all the way to the bitter end."

Aresco: "I would echo that to the extent that we like the divisional play. Our membership enjoys it. We weren't looking to try to play this way [divisionless play, top two ]...We like divisions. I'd like to someday do it again. The question is can you add a team that will really enhance your brand, enhance your strength? ... We just want to be deliberate with it. We don't want to be rushed into anything."
Went on to use "...inactive but alert - you're always alert for possibilities."
And then reiterates: "Our membership does like the divisional play. Absolutely. We like the twelve teams, we've enjoyed the divisions...We LOVE the divisional play" and stresses that the eleven-team schedule will include as much as possible of the old divisions.

Hunh. Maybe these last couple interviews aren't any new tone at all...

http://wakeupcalldt.podbean.com/e/dan-to...eday-more/

There was even a 464-post thread on it here
https://csnbbs.com/thread-886988-post-16433219.html
Some of you posted multiple times in it but apparently without actually listening to what he said. Quelle surprise.

In fact...I kept reading that thread...post #40, here's a guy with a Buddy Ebsen avatar saying "He made it clear that the AAC members strongly prefer the East/West divisional format...He said that he himself hopes that "someday," we'd like to go back to 2 divisions."
https://csnbbs.com/thread-886988-post-16...id16433626

Another point -- it's even older than UConn's departure.

It was in 2016, faced with the BigXII expansion kabuki dance that Aresco said "We're not gonna dilute the brand." Faced with a raid at the top of the conference, with a far greater threat of diminution than the shoot-themselves-in-the-paw departure of the UConn Huskies...Aresco said we weren't going to take a warm body just to make a number.

That probably contributes to so many of the thoughtful posters here actually understanding the dichotomy that really isn't a dichotomy of prefer divisions/willing to wait at eleven.

December 2019.
Remember all the discussion after Aresco and an ESPN suit were on a panel at a conference and both agreed we were looking at adjustments.

Follow up after the fact to that Morning Consult piece

Quote:“I think down the road, I think our schools would like to get back to 12. We like divisional play in football," said Aresco, who indicated that only a handful of teams would be a perfect fit for the AAC.

Article is under the byline of Matt Murschel of the Orlando Sentinel but here it is picked up by the Annapolis Capital.
https://www.capitalgazette.com/os-sp-aac...story.html

(01-26-2021 10:27 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  The mention of 14 schools is new. The tone and empathic declaration of the benefits of going to 12 schools is new.

After reading the tea leaves, something is stirring (IMHO).

Agree. Any mention of 14 puts a new face on the expansion possibility, and that can't happen realistically without the media rights partner weighing in. I have a feeling that the expansion of the CFP will be driving the expansion of the AAC. There must be some 'behind the scenes' moving of the chess pieces on a scale larger than the AAC.

(01-26-2021 02:06 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 09:53 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 04:09 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  Even though Aresco's main point is that "nothing is happening" right now, he also noted that he really isn't free to talk about any of these things in any detail, which suggests that there may be a lot of interesting details that he can't talk about.

Aresco is well known for playing the cards extremely close to the vest. Hardly anyone heard a word about Wichita State joining the AAC until the news was announced. So, when he says that "it's possible" "down the road," that could mean anything ranging from '(even though there's nothing happening right now at this moment), there are schools that might possibly join in a year or two and might be in contact with us' to 'nothing means "absolutely nothing," and no prospects of anything developing.'

The truth is probably somewhere in between those two extremes, but his unequivocal, emphatic tone suggests that the conference would prefer to get back to 12 sooner, rather than later, and for that reason, it may be possible that "nothing happening right now" is a bit of an overstatement.

.

But what's most telling about Aresco's remarks are:

1) The fact that he made the strongest statement ever, since Connecticut's departure, indicating that the AAC not only wants to be back "at 12," but providing four separate reasons why the conference wants to replace Connecticut:

--a) "We enjoyed divisional play."

--b) "scheduling 11 teams...creates a lot of scheduling difficulties."

--c) "We cant provide ESPN with as much of the Thursday and Friday product as we'd like."

--d) One of the disadvantages of not having divisional play is that, as the season wore on, a lot of AAC fans were thinking about how their teams could have won their divisions, but they missed out on that feature of divisional play.

From the emphatic and unequivocal tone of these comments, Aresco's words suggest that the conference feels very strongly about wanting to replace Connecticut, and would prefer to be making continuing progress in that direction.

2) For perhaps the first time, Aresco mentioned the possibility of a full-fledged expansion beyond 12 teams, and acknowledged that the idea of expanding to 14 has at least been heard or suggested as a "reasonable" possibility.

.

Thus, while his words suggest that the possibility of adding Boise State (or SDSU) may be over for now, on indefinite hold, or (as he put it in a slightly earlier interview) "on the back burner"...

We have thus, it seems, learned something new:

The AAC is, for a number of different reasons, very strongly inclined and motivated to "get back to 12" and is likely to consider the idea of an eventual expansion to 14 to be at least "reasonable" [/color] and worthy of consideration, whether or not it is likely to occur within the foreseeable future. In fact, he went further than noting that the idea has been mentioned (i.e., "heard"), when he proceeded to state that ..."you have to be alert to the possibilities" (an imperative declaration).

His mention of not being able to provide ESPN with enough of the Thursday and Friday product suggests that there is some urgency having something to do with the AAC's partnership with ESPN. This might suggest the possibility that ESPN is actively encouraging the AAC to get back to 12 so that the network will have more content to provide on Thursdays and Fridays.

Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

I would disagree and have said so previously. The presidents are capable of having multiple preferences at the same time. These prefrences are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary. It can be true that the presidents prefer 12 and---at the same time---also prefer 11 to adding a team that reduces value or reduces the overall quality/perception of the league. In fact---it would be quite reasonable for both statements to likely be true of the presidents position on replacing UConn.

Look--leagues very rarely get the opportunity to replace their worst football program . This is a incredible opportunity to improve the league that must not be squandered.

The TONE from Aresco has always been we would prefer divisions BUT we would stand pat at eleven rather than add a program dilutive to the conference brand.

I agree with you and AttackCoog that this has been the substance and content of the conference's official position all along. The only place where there is disagreement among us and half of the readers on this board is about which programs would be too dilutive to the conference brand.

Some say CSU would be ok. Some say Nevada or SDSU or Air Force would be. Others insist that BYU, Boise, and Army are the only possible candidates. There is a remarkable lack of agreement about which schools would meet the conference's criteria. The list of people who know for sure seems to be very short.

.
BTW, the word "tone" above that was used to describe Aresco's comments, was referring to a psychological construct, known as "affective tone:"

"Affective tone is often the difference between what one says and the inflection with which they say it..."

https://psychologydictionary.org/affective-tone/

The reference to an apparent change in (affective) tone was based on his use of affective terms and the emphatic and unequivocal nature of Aresco's recent statements.

The official position (the substance and content of what was said), as stated by Aresco didn't change fundamentally, but his recent interview may have been the first in which he has itemized a series of detailed reasons why the conference is so hopeful to add a 12th team.

If he hadn't mentioned his specific concerns about providing the Thursday/Friday content for ESPN, his comments wouldn't have been quite as compelling as they were from the standpoint of affective tone.

I also found his comment about many in the AAC missing the competition for divisional championships to be compelling because of the emotion or affect that it referred to.

Another affective term that he emphasized was that "we liked" divisional play. "Liking" is an affective term.

Some people are unfamiliar with the concept of "affective tone," and may not be persuaded that concepts or terms such as "missing" or "liking" describe affective states or emotions. People can agree to disagree on this discussion of semantics.

That's enough psych. 101 for an entire year...

(01-26-2021 01:39 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 11:50 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 11:45 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 10:52 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 10:48 PM)pesik Wrote:  in a new aresco interview from today we are targeting 12 in football...but arent against 14 if the right teams come along

Now that’s actual news.

At the Vatican, don't they do some preliminary smoke signals before the one the announces the new pope? Was that a smoke signal? Did a certain network give a blessing? Just asking. Haven't seen the transcripts of the of the conversation yet.

I’m watching a Food Network show about Philadelphia and i am missing Philly food so bad.

It tastes good but most of it is bad for your health. I have moved on. As a city, I love Philly. Used to live downtown at two different places and then rented and bought another in the Mt. Airy neighborhood. Moved slowly westward, then a fast jump across the country.

Well, that's a given... Name a healthy food that tastes good...

(01-26-2021 06:17 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:39 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 11:50 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 11:45 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 10:52 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Now that’s actual news.

At the Vatican, don't they do some preliminary smoke signals before the one the announces the new pope? Was that a smoke signal? Did a certain network give a blessing? Just asking. Haven't seen the transcripts of the of the conversation yet.

I’m watching a Food Network show about Philadelphia and i am missing Philly food so bad.

It tastes good but most of it is bad for your health. I have moved on. As a city, I love Philly. Used to live downtown at two different places and then rented and bought another in the Mt. Airy neighborhood. Moved slowly westward, then a fast jump across the country.

Well, that's a given... Name a healthy food that tastes good...

What, you don't like guacamole?

(01-26-2021 05:41 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 02:06 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 09:53 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

I would disagree and have said so previously. The presidents are capable of having multiple preferences at the same time. These prefrences are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary. It can be true that the presidents prefer 12 and---at the same time---also prefer 11 to adding a team that reduces value or reduces the overall quality/perception of the league. In fact---it would be quite reasonable for both statements to likely be true of the presidents position on replacing UConn.

Look--leagues very rarely get the opportunity to replace their worst football program . This is a incredible opportunity to improve the league that must not be squandered.

The TONE from Aresco has always been we would prefer divisions BUT we would stand pat at eleven rather than add a program dilutive to the conference brand.

I agree with you and AttackCoog that this has been the substance and content of the conference's official position all along. The only place where there is disagreement among us and half of the readers on this board is about which programs would be too dilutive to the conference brand.

Some say CSU would be ok. Some say Nevada or SDSU or Air Force would be. Others insist that BYU, Boise, and Army are the only possible candidates. There is a remarkable lack of agreement about which schools would meet the conference's criteria. The list of people who know for sure seems to be very short.

.
BTW, the word "tone" above that was used to describe Aresco's comments, was referring to a psychological construct, known as "affective tone:"

"Affective tone is often the difference between what one says and the inflection with which they say it..."

https://psychologydictionary.org/affective-tone/

The reference to an apparent change in (affective) tone was based on his use of affective terms and the emphatic and unequivocal nature of Aresco's recent statements.

The official position (the substance and content of what was said), as stated by Aresco didn't change fundamentally, but his recent interview may have been the first in which he has itemized a series of detailed reasons why the conference is so hopeful to add a 12th team.

If he hadn't mentioned his specific concerns about providing the Thursday/Friday content for ESPN, his comments wouldn't have been quite as compelling as they were from the standpoint of affective tone.

I also found his comment about many in the AAC missing the competition for divisional championships to be compelling because of the emotion or affect that it referred to.

Another affective term that he emphasized was that "we liked" divisional play. "Liking" is an affective term.

Some people are unfamiliar with the concept of "affective tone," and may not be persuaded that concepts or terms such as "missing" or "liking" describe affective states or emotions. People can agree to disagree on this discussion of semantics.

That's enough psych. 101 for an entire year...

Whatever you say Professor Dunning-Krueger

(01-26-2021 06:49 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 05:41 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 02:06 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 09:53 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

I would disagree and have said so previously. The presidents are capable of having multiple preferences at the same time. These prefrences are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary. It can be true that the presidents prefer 12 and---at the same time---also prefer 11 to adding a team that reduces value or reduces the overall quality/perception of the league. In fact---it would be quite reasonable for both statements to likely be true of the presidents position on replacing UConn.

Look--leagues very rarely get the opportunity to replace their worst football program . This is a incredible opportunity to improve the league that must not be squandered.

The TONE from Aresco has always been we would prefer divisions BUT we would stand pat at eleven rather than add a program dilutive to the conference brand.

I agree with you and AttackCoog that this has been the substance and content of the conference's official position all along. The only place where there is disagreement among us and half of the readers on this board is about which programs would be too dilutive to the conference brand.

Some say CSU would be ok. Some say Nevada or SDSU or Air Force would be. Others insist that BYU, Boise, and Army are the only possible candidates. There is a remarkable lack of agreement about which schools would meet the conference's criteria. The list of people who know for sure seems to be very short.

.
BTW, the word "tone" above that was used to describe Aresco's comments, was referring to a psychological construct, known as "affective tone:"

"Affective tone is often the difference between what one says and the inflection with which they say it..."

https://psychologydictionary.org/affective-tone/

The reference to an apparent change in (affective) tone was based on his use of affective terms and the emphatic and unequivocal nature of Aresco's recent statements.

The official position (the substance and content of what was said), as stated by Aresco didn't change fundamentally, but his recent interview may have been the first in which he has itemized a series of detailed reasons why the conference is so hopeful to add a 12th team.

If he hadn't mentioned his specific concerns about providing the Thursday/Friday content for ESPN, his comments wouldn't have been quite as compelling as they were from the standpoint of affective tone.

I also found his comment about many in the AAC missing the competition for divisional championships to be compelling because of the emotion or affect that it referred to.

Another affective term that he emphasized was that "we liked" divisional play. "Liking" is an affective term.

Some people are unfamiliar with the concept of "affective tone," and may not be persuaded that concepts or terms such as "missing" or "liking" describe affective states or emotions. People can agree to disagree on this discussion of semantics.

That's enough psych. 101 for an entire year...

Whatever you say...

From one professor/professional to another.

.

Whether there has been a shift in tone or not won't matter unless it affects the probability that the AAC Presidents will be able to come to a consensus about which schools they would be prepared to invite.

(01-26-2021 06:24 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:17 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:39 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 11:50 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 11:45 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  At the Vatican, don't they do some preliminary smoke signals before the one the announces the new pope? Was that a smoke signal? Did a certain network give a blessing? Just asking. Haven't seen the transcripts of the of the conversation yet.

I’m watching a Food Network show about Philadelphia and i am missing Philly food so bad.

It tastes good but most of it is bad for your health. I have moved on. As a city, I love Philly. Used to live downtown at two different places and then rented and bought another in the Mt. Airy neighborhood. Moved slowly westward, then a fast jump across the country.

Well, that's a given... Name a healthy food that tastes good...

What, you don't like guacamole?

Sure, but it's not a meal or a snack or desert.

(01-26-2021 05:41 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 02:06 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 09:53 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  Jed, thats not new.
We always PREFERRED 12 teams and divisions. The whole time

Just can't add a net negative to get to twelve. Just want to avoid any perceived or self-imposed time pressure forcing a bad decision.

Talking about fourteen is new.

You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

I would disagree and have said so previously. The presidents are capable of having multiple preferences at the same time. These prefrences are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary. It can be true that the presidents prefer 12 and---at the same time---also prefer 11 to adding a team that reduces value or reduces the overall quality/perception of the league. In fact---it would be quite reasonable for both statements to likely be true of the presidents position on replacing UConn.

Look--leagues very rarely get the opportunity to replace their worst football program . This is a incredible opportunity to improve the league that must not be squandered.

The TONE from Aresco has always been we would prefer divisions BUT we would stand pat at eleven rather than add a program dilutive to the conference brand.

I agree with you and AttackCoog that this has been the substance and content of the conference's official position all along. The only place where there is disagreement among us and half of the readers on this board is about which programs would be too dilutive to the conference brand.

Some say CSU would be ok. Some say Nevada or SDSU or Air Force would be. Others insist that BYU, Boise, and Army are the only possible candidates. There is a remarkable lack of agreement about which schools would meet the conference's criteria. The list of people who know for sure seems to be very short.

.
BTW, the word "tone" above that was used to describe Aresco's comments, was referring to a psychological construct, known as "affective tone:"

"Affective tone is often the difference between what one says and the inflection with which they say it..."

https://psychologydictionary.org/affective-tone/

The reference to an apparent change in (affective) tone was based on his use of affective terms and the emphatic and unequivocal nature of Aresco's recent statements.

The official position (the substance and content of what was said), as stated by Aresco didn't change fundamentally, but his recent interview may have been the first in which he has itemized a series of detailed reasons why the conference is so hopeful to add a 12th team.

If he hadn't mentioned his specific concerns about providing the Thursday/Friday content for ESPN, his comments wouldn't have been quite as compelling as they were from the standpoint of affective tone.

I also found his comment about many in the AAC missing the competition for divisional championships to be compelling because of the emotion or affect that it referred to.

Another affective term that he emphasized was that "we liked" divisional play. "Liking" is an affective term.

Some people are unfamiliar with the concept of "affective tone," and may not be persuaded that concepts or terms such as "missing" or "liking" describe affective states or emotions. People can agree to disagree on this discussion of semantics.

That's enough psych. 101 for an entire year...

Part of the reasoning for that is that Army only fits if they are the only addition.

if the objective is for a western wing all sports then I would think BYU, BSU and SDSU with football emphasis (maybe AF) or BYU, SDSU and UNLV/Nevada for overall sports quality.

My guess... BYU, BSU and SDSU all sports.

(01-26-2021 07:31 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 05:41 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 02:06 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 09:53 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  You and I may have always preferred 12 teams and divisions, but in the months after UConn announced their departure, Commissioner Aresco was whistling a very different tune. Perhaps he was just "whistling in the dark," but he continued to play that tune for over a year.

He was quoted more than once as saying that the AAC would be perfectly happy to go on indefinitely with 11 schools, and that all that would be needed was a waiver to play a championship game.

In fact, he made such a convincing case that he managed to persuade almost half of the posters on this message board that the conference would be better off with 11 FB & BB schools, indefinitely.

.

With a little effort, we could pull up his statements on the topic of 11 vs. 12 schools, and the quotations of Aresco would show that he didn't start to signal a change in tone until mid-way through 2020.

By mid-autumn, there was a discernable shift in tone, but only in these most recent interviews has he made it crystal clear that the American is now extremely emphatic about the importance of replacing Connecticut.

I'm guessing that they year of Covid has had something to do with the change in tone. The economics of broadcasting have changed, and ESPN has taken a hit, as have all the FBS universities.

I would disagree and have said so previously. The presidents are capable of having multiple preferences at the same time. These prefrences are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They can be complimentary. It can be true that the presidents prefer 12 and---at the same time---also prefer 11 to adding a team that reduces value or reduces the overall quality/perception of the league. In fact---it would be quite reasonable for both statements to likely be true of the presidents position on replacing UConn.

Look--leagues very rarely get the opportunity to replace their worst football program . This is a incredible opportunity to improve the league that must not be squandered.

The TONE from Aresco has always been we would prefer divisions BUT we would stand pat at eleven rather than add a program dilutive to the conference brand.

I agree with you and AttackCoog that this has been the substance and content of the conference's official position all along. The only place where there is disagreement among us and half of the readers on this board is about which programs would be too dilutive to the conference brand.

Some say CSU would be ok. Some say Nevada or SDSU or Air Force would be. Others insist that BYU, Boise, and Army are the only possible candidates. There is a remarkable lack of agreement about which schools would meet the conference's criteria. The list of people who know for sure seems to be very short.

.
BTW, the word "tone" above that was used to describe Aresco's comments, was referring to a psychological construct, known as "affective tone:"

"Affective tone is often the difference between what one says and the inflection with which they say it..."

https://psychologydictionary.org/affective-tone/

The reference to an apparent change in (affective) tone was based on his use of affective terms and the emphatic and unequivocal nature of Aresco's recent statements.

The official position (the substance and content of what was said), as stated by Aresco didn't change fundamentally, but his recent interview may have been the first in which he has itemized a series of detailed reasons why the conference is so hopeful to add a 12th team.

If he hadn't mentioned his specific concerns about providing the Thursday/Friday content for ESPN, his comments wouldn't have been quite as compelling as they were from the standpoint of affective tone.

I also found his comment about many in the AAC missing the competition for divisional championships to be compelling because of the emotion or affect that it referred to.

Another affective term that he emphasized was that "we liked" divisional play. "Liking" is an affective term.

Some people are unfamiliar with the concept of "affective tone," and may not be persuaded that concepts or terms such as "missing" or "liking" describe affective states or emotions. People can agree to disagree on this discussion of semantics.

That's enough psych. 101 for an entire year...

Part of the reasoning for that is that Army only fits if they are the only addition.

if the objective is for a western wing all sports then I would think BYU, BSU and SDSU with football emphasis (maybe AF) or BYU, SDSU and UNLV/Nevada for overall sports quality.

My guess... BYU, BSU and SDSU all sports.

Army fits nicely with Air Force, who recently was making noise about leaving and is a nice bridge between Texas/Oklahoma and Utah.

BYU is just enough sugar to maybe make it worth it to take Boise and the anchor they are spiraling towards, it would likely end them being divas as well, that's BYU's role and they're better at it.

(01-26-2021 07:18 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:24 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 06:17 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:39 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 11:50 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  I’m watching a Food Network show about Philadelphia and i am missing Philly food so bad.

It tastes good but most of it is bad for your health. I have moved on. As a city, I love Philly. Used to live downtown at two different places and then rented and bought another in the Mt. Airy neighborhood. Moved slowly westward, then a fast jump across the country.

Well, that's a given... Name a healthy food that tastes good...

What, you don't like guacamole?

Sure, but it's not a meal or a snack or desert.

Put me in a cabana on a desert island with an attractive girlfriend, 40 large bags of Doritos lime-flavored tortilla chips, 20 pounds of limes, 150 ripening avocadoes, a walk-in cooler loaded with beverages and a few jars of salsa, and I'll happily live on that for a week!