Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Prospective expansion question
Author Message
TripleA Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,837
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1903
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:

Memphis Hall of Fame
Post: #21
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 03:23 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 01:01 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 12:05 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 11:57 AM)usffan Wrote:  Yes, I know, it's the topic that never goes away (and singlehandedly fuels a certain Beverly Hillbilly who used to be addicted to posting polls). But I saw this article in The Athletic:

https://theathletic.com/2295613/2021/01/...ed_article

And it says the following:


I guess I missed this bit of news. Divisional requirements are now formally no longer required? If that's the case, is there really a driver for AAC expansion?

USFFan


The response to Boise tells us all we need to know. The AAC is going to sit tight no matter what, excepting BYU or an Academy wanting in.

The response to Boise was to invite Boise FB to join the AAC.

They didn't sit tight" in Boise's case. They offered them a membership.

Not true, that's what you read into the situation.

So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.
01-05-2021 10:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 4,561
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 140
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #22
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 03:23 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 01:01 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 12:05 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  The response to Boise tells us all we need to know. The AAC is going to sit tight no matter what, excepting BYU or an Academy wanting in.

The response to Boise was to invite Boise FB to join the AAC.

They didn't sit tight" in Boise's case. They offered them a membership.

Not true, that's what you read into the situation.

So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

Football only makes sense for the AAC.

Boise insisting on full membership likely points to a lack of desired non-fb options.
01-05-2021 10:43 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,578
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 236
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 03:23 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 01:01 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 12:05 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  The response to Boise tells us all we need to know. The AAC is going to sit tight no matter what, excepting BYU or an Academy wanting in.

The response to Boise was to invite Boise FB to join the AAC.

They didn't sit tight" in Boise's case. They offered them a membership.

Not true, that's what you read into the situation.

So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.
01-05-2021 10:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoOwls111 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,451
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Owls
Location: NYC
Post: #24
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-04-2021 02:54 PM)pvtlamb Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 12:46 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 11:57 AM)usffan Wrote:  Yes, I know, it's the topic that never goes away (and singlehandedly fuels a certain Beverly Hillbilly who used to be addicted to posting polls). But I saw this article in The Athletic:

https://theathletic.com/2295613/2021/01/...ed_article

And it says the following:

Quote:Yet with the NCAA removing divisional requirements for conference championship games, perhaps the league should re-evaluate its entire structure.

I guess I missed this bit of news. Divisional requirements are now formally no longer required? If that's the case, is there really a driver for AAC expansion?

USFFan

If true, saw this format for Patriot League (MBB)

CENTRAL
Lafayette Leopards
Lehigh Mountain Hawks
Bucknell Bison

NORTH
Boston Univ. Terriers
Holy Cross Crusaders
Army Black Knights
Colgate Raiders

SOUTH
American Eagles
Loyola (MD) Greyhounds
Navy Midshipmen

... made me think of this for AAC All sports, including football... ACC will probably love it as well with their "wet dream" of getting ND for all sports including football.

East:
Cincinnati
ECU
UCF
USF
Temple

Central:
Houston
Memphis
SMU
Tulsa
Tulane

West:
BSU
BYU
CSU/UNLV/Nevada/Fresno/(AF/Gonzaga)
Navy/WSU
SDSU

This would be a pretty good all around conference with an effort to minimize travel expenses

Divisions used for scheduling purpose.

It doesn't really minimize WSU's travel. They need to be in the Central; every team in the Central Time Zone.

Agree with you... But Navy/WSU might be the most logical fit out west, but that is just my thought/opinion
01-07-2021 10:53 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,736
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #25
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-04-2021 12:46 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 11:57 AM)usffan Wrote:  I saw this article in The Athletic:

https://theathletic.com/2295613/2021/01/...ed_article

And it says:

Quote:Yet with the NCAA removing divisional requirements for conference championship games, perhaps the league should re-evaluate its entire structure.

USFFan



... made me think of this for AAC All sports, including football... ACC will probably love it as well with their "wet dream" of getting ND for all sports including football.

East:
Cincinnati
ECU
UCF
USF
Temple

Central:
Houston
Memphis
SMU
Tulsa
Tulane

West:
BSU
BYU
CSU/UNLV/Nevada/Fresno/(AF/Gonzaga)
Navy/WSU
SDSU

Doubt they would go with 15 schools in 3 divisions. If the western schools were to join, this would seem more likely:

Schools with greatest near-term potential to have top 30 football and/or NCAA-quality basketball programs are printed in bold typeface:

East:

Cincinnati^*
Memphis^*
UCF^

Tulane
USF
Temple
ECU

West:

Houston*
BYU^*
Navy^/WSU*
Boise^/Gonzaga*
SDSU^*
SMU^*
Tulsa^


*Probable/potential NCAA quality basketball program.
^Probable near-term Top 30 quality football program.

.

Number of probable NCAA quality basketball programs: 8

Number of probable (near-term) Top 30 FBS programs: 9

.

Question: Which P5 conferences have more than 8 probable NCAA tournament-quality basketball programs and 9 probable top 30 FBS programs?
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2021 11:28 AM by jedclampett.)
01-07-2021 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TripleA Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,837
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1903
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:

Memphis Hall of Fame
Post: #26
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 03:23 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 01:01 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  The response to Boise was to invite Boise FB to join the AAC.

They didn't sit tight" in Boise's case. They offered them a membership.

Not true, that's what you read into the situation.

So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.
01-07-2021 01:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,578
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 236
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #27
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 03:23 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Not true, that's what you read into the situation.

So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.

We don't seem interested in doing much to help that happen do we? Navy was a home run, we needed to work through certain things to make it work and we wanted to, so even after all the craziness, we made sure to get through those issues. Are you telling me if Army or BYU made the sort of inquiry Boise did we wouldn't say yes and then make sure it happened? Boise is a solid pitch, we might take a swing, we might work the count for a better pitch. We really wan't a hanging curve (BYU) or a nice fastball belt high down the pipe (Army), Boise is more like a borderline strike low and outside.
01-07-2021 01:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 34,667
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1799
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #28
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 03:23 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Not true, that's what you read into the situation.

So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.

Exactly. We are looking to add value. If we add Boise for "all sports", we probably cost each existing school money due to increased travel costs that dont exist if we simply add them as a "football only". The real Boise value for the AAC is Boise football. If we can get Boise football without adding the travel costs of an "all sports" Boise add---then I would say that is a homerun. 04-cheers
(This post was last modified: 01-07-2021 02:04 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-07-2021 01:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,736
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-07-2021 01:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.

Exactly. We are looking to add value. If we add Boise for "all sports", we probably cost each existing school money due to increased travel costs that dont exist if we simply add them as a "football only". The real Boise value for the AAC is Boise football. If we can get Boise football without adding the travel costs of an "all sports" Boise add---then I would say that is a homerun. 04-cheers

Definitely a home run, and very possibly a grand slam from a viewership standpoint, in the sense that there are 3 AAC teams "on base" (e.g., Cincy, UCF, Memphis, SMU, Tulsa) that would be able to "score" (with 500,000+ or 1M+ viewership games vs. Boise State).

If "not a home run," what would it be? A bunt? A foul ball? A pop fly?
01-07-2021 01:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panicstricken Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,476
Joined: Nov 2007
Reputation: 184
I Root For: Tulsa
Location:
Post: #30
RE: Prospective expansion question
I like the #1 vs #2 Matchup
01-07-2021 06:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,770
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 534
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #31
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-07-2021 01:37 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.

Exactly. We are looking to add value. If we add Boise for "all sports", we probably cost each existing school money due to increased travel costs that dont exist if we simply add them as a "football only". The real Boise value for the AAC is Boise football. If we can get Boise football without adding the travel costs of an "all sports" Boise add---then I would say that is a homerun. 04-cheers

Definitely a home run, and very possibly a grand slam from a viewership standpoint, in the sense that there are 3 AAC teams "on base" (e.g., Cincy, UCF, Memphis, SMU, Tulsa) that would be able to "score" (with 500,000+ or 1M+ viewership games vs. Boise State).

If "not a home run," what would it be? A bunt? A foul ball? A pop fly?
Facts are facts. And Boise and the AAC have spoken. The only question is would the new leadership at Boise change their minds on football only? Likely no because new leadership doesn't mean a different situation for their non football sports.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
01-08-2021 09:01 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 4,561
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 140
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #32
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-08-2021 09:01 AM)panama Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:37 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.

Exactly. We are looking to add value. If we add Boise for "all sports", we probably cost each existing school money due to increased travel costs that dont exist if we simply add them as a "football only". The real Boise value for the AAC is Boise football. If we can get Boise football without adding the travel costs of an "all sports" Boise add---then I would say that is a homerun. 04-cheers

Definitely a home run, and very possibly a grand slam from a viewership standpoint, in the sense that there are 3 AAC teams "on base" (e.g., Cincy, UCF, Memphis, SMU, Tulsa) that would be able to "score" (with 500,000+ or 1M+ viewership games vs. Boise State).

If "not a home run," what would it be? A bunt? A foul ball? A pop fly?
Facts are facts. And Boise and the AAC have spoken. The only question is would the new leadership at Boise change their minds on football only? Likely no because new leadership doesn't mean a different situation for their non football sports.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

They have to have a better solution for Non-FB if they jump.

WAC has a couple close schools but an awful lot that are long distance.

Big Sky is probably too small time for their self-perception but is a geographic fit.

Big West was the plan when they decided to try the Big East but without SDSU may not be an option.

MWC probably says hell no without FB.
01-08-2021 11:12 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Atlanta Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,764
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 473
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: Metro Atlanta
Post: #33
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-07-2021 11:18 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 12:46 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  
(01-04-2021 11:57 AM)usffan Wrote:  I saw this article in The Athletic:

https://theathletic.com/2295613/2021/01/...ed_article

And it says:

Quote:Yet with the NCAA removing divisional requirements for conference championship games, perhaps the league should re-evaluate its entire structure.

USFFan



... made me think of this for AAC All sports, including football... ACC will probably love it as well with their "wet dream" of getting ND for all sports including football.

East:
Cincinnati
ECU
UCF
USF
Temple

Central:
Houston
Memphis
SMU
Tulsa
Tulane

West:
BSU
BYU
CSU/UNLV/Nevada/Fresno/(AF/Gonzaga)
Navy/WSU
SDSU

Doubt they would go with 15 schools in 3 divisions. If the western schools were to join, this would seem more likely:

Schools with greatest near-term potential to have top 30 football and/or NCAA-quality basketball programs are printed in bold typeface:

East:

Cincinnati^*
Memphis^*
UCF^

Tulane
USF
Temple
ECU

West:

Houston*
BYU^*
Navy^/WSU*
[b]Boise^/Gonzaga*

SDSU^*
SMU^*
Tulsa^[/b]

*Probable/potential NCAA quality basketball program.
^Probable near-term Top 30 quality football program.

.

Number of probable NCAA quality basketball programs: 8

Number of probable (near-term) Top 30 FBS programs: 9

.

Question: Which P5 conferences have more than 8 probable NCAA tournament-quality basketball programs and 9 probable top 30 FBS programs?

Boise has a pretty good MBB program, certainly good enough to play in the AAC if not for the distance & other olympic sports for travel. Knowing that, aside for the current Gonzaga status, it makes no sense to suggest Gonzaga in place of Boise olympic sports since Gonzaga is even slightly farther away. If we are going to have a western div, just bring Boise in for all sports. We can always find room for Gonzaga apart from a football-centric expansion.
01-08-2021 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
rath v2.0 Offline
Wartime Consigliere
*

Posts: 38,593
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 1127
I Root For: ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Location: Tip Of The Mitt

Donators
Post: #34
RE: Prospective expansion question
Gonzaga would laugh their way to the floor if Aresco called them.
01-08-2021 12:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SMUstang Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,031
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 107
I Root For: SMU Mustangs
Location: Horseshoe Bay, Texas
Post: #35
RE: Prospective expansion question
We'll see. But from my perspective it's either Boise State for football only. Or BSU, BYU, and SDSU with full memberships, with most play within Divisions. Or stand pat at 11 members.
(This post was last modified: 01-08-2021 04:59 PM by SMUstang.)
01-08-2021 04:55 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fishpro10987 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 848
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-08-2021 04:55 PM)SMUstang Wrote:  We'll see. But from my perspective it's either Boise State for football only. Or BSU, BYU, and SDSU with full memberships, with most play within Divisions. Or stand pat at 11 members.

As I have stated before the money for two of these is already accounted for thru ESPN contracts. I would hope that the savings that ESPN garnered by losing the MWC media rights could be enough to bring in the third. I suspect BYU is the hold-up on a 3 team add. They are holding out for B12 expansion in their next TV deal, which I seriously doubt is happening, but BYU wants the door slammed in their face before deciding the CFP access is best obtained through AAC.
01-08-2021 10:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pony94 Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 23,712
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 776
I Root For: SMU
Location: Bee Cave, TX
Post: #37
Prospective expansion question
(01-08-2021 10:18 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  
(01-08-2021 04:55 PM)SMUstang Wrote:  We'll see. But from my perspective it's either Boise State for football only. Or BSU, BYU, and SDSU with full memberships, with most play within Divisions. Or stand pat at 11 members.

As I have stated before the money for two of these is already accounted for thru ESPN contracts. I would hope that the savings that ESPN garnered by losing the MWC media rights could be enough to bring in the third. I suspect BYU is the hold-up on a 3 team add. They are holding out for B12 expansion in their next TV deal, which I seriously doubt is happening, but BYU wants the door slammed in their face before deciding the CFP access is best obtained through AAC.


Big 12 shooting for no action, then Arizona schools and if that fails and if forced then Florida schools.
01-08-2021 11:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,578
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 236
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #38
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-08-2021 11:42 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  
(01-08-2021 10:18 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  
(01-08-2021 04:55 PM)SMUstang Wrote:  We'll see. But from my perspective it's either Boise State for football only. Or BSU, BYU, and SDSU with full memberships, with most play within Divisions. Or stand pat at 11 members.

As I have stated before the money for two of these is already accounted for thru ESPN contracts. I would hope that the savings that ESPN garnered by losing the MWC media rights could be enough to bring in the third. I suspect BYU is the hold-up on a 3 team add. They are holding out for B12 expansion in their next TV deal, which I seriously doubt is happening, but BYU wants the door slammed in their face before deciding the CFP access is best obtained through AAC.


Big 12 shooting for no action, then Arizona schools and if that fails and if forced then Florida schools.

An acquaintance of mine who donates well to OU has told me the same. They don't want to do anything. Otherwise trying to pick off the Arizona schools is preferred.
01-09-2021 12:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TripleA Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,837
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1903
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:

Memphis Hall of Fame
Post: #39
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-07-2021 01:17 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 07:25 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  So you're suggesting that the AAC didn't offer Boise FB an invitation to join the AAC?

I wonder if anyone around here will agree with you.

Actually, I think you're both wrong. Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

This is correct.

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

Which means BSU is not a homerun even at football only.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.

We don't seem interested in doing much to help that happen do we? Navy was a home run, we needed to work through certain things to make it work and we wanted to, so even after all the craziness, we made sure to get through those issues. Are you telling me if Army or BYU made the sort of inquiry Boise did we wouldn't say yes and then make sure it happened? Boise is a solid pitch, we might take a swing, we might work the count for a better pitch. We really wan't a hanging curve (BYU) or a nice fastball belt high down the pipe (Army), Boise is more like a borderline strike low and outside.

You are assuming things for which there is no evidence. We were willing to do football only. Boise wants all sports. Nothing happened.

If Boise won't take football only, we can't force them. If we weren't willing to take them football only, then why have the convo at all? Which we did.
(This post was last modified: 01-09-2021 08:28 AM by TripleA.)
01-09-2021 08:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,736
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 08:27 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:17 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:44 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-05-2021 10:22 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Boise contacted us about membership. We said we might be interested in football only. Boise said they wanted all sports. End of conversation.

VERY GLIBLY PUT!

For sure, we did NOT offer Boise membership. We DID discuss the possibility of football only, spurred by Boise's initiation, not ours.

OBVIOUSLY NOTHING MORE THAN PURE SPECULATION BASED ON NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BEYOND PRIOR CONVERSATION.

All this occurred months ago, just now coming to light. That AD is no longer at Boise.

SPOKEN AS IF HE'S A TRUE INSIDER, WHICH HE OBVIOUSLY ISN'T.

This is correct. THAT MAY BE WHAT YOU SURMISE, BUT YOU MAY BE RESPONDING PREMATURELY, ON THE BASIS OF LIMITED INFORMATION

Some people have read a lot more into this than is there. We told them no, to all sports, but that we would consider football only. That's as far as it ever went.

RESPONSE: THAT MAY BE YOUR IMPRESSION, BUT THERE ARE OTHERS WITH MORE INFORMATION THAT YOU MAY NOT BE AWARE OF.

IDK about your definition of home run, but we likely would accept Boise as football only, just not all sports.

We don't seem interested in doing much to help that happen do we? Navy was a home run, we needed to work through certain things to make it work and we wanted to, so even after all the craziness, we made sure to get through those issues. Are you telling me if Army or BYU made the sort of inquiry Boise did we wouldn't say yes and then make sure it happened? Boise is a solid pitch, we might take a swing, we might work the count for a better pitch. We really wan't a hanging curve (BYU) or a nice fastball belt high down the pipe (Army), Boise is more like a borderline strike low and outside.

We were willing to do football only. Boise wants all sports. Nothing happened.

If Boise won't take football only, we can't force them.

I've got a beef with words like "Nothing happened...we can't force them."

Maybe that's the way things work in a world where entrepreneurship is banned by the state, or in a world in which everyone is too depressed or frightened to get up off their backside to try anything new.

But in a nation like the United States, no one gets anywhere by b*tching and moaning and complaining about things, and then wondering why we're stuck with things the way they are, rather than the way they should be.

Like in our case, everybody wants to be in a power conference, or for the AAC to become a power conference, but everyone seems to feel so helpless and impotent that they can't even imagine the possibility of doing anything about it.

.

I don't want to be too hard on Commissioner Aresco, because from outward appearances, the AAC Presidents have drilled the idea into him that he'd better not even think about making a single move to do anything more than think about his strategic plan for the AAC - - or else!

.

It doesn't make sense, though, does it? Why would the AAC Presidents scare the life out of him or slam the door in his face whenever he gets a chance to bring a team like the Broncos into the conference?

Are they all terrified by the pandemic that they're afraid to even pick up a telephone to talk about taking action, or totally doped up in a stupor and blimped-out on anti-depressants or anti-psychotics to such an extent that they can't even think straight?

Or something else, like this:

Is it possible that the 4 AAC schools that have refused to sign a GOR (Grant of Rights agreement) are dead-set against replacing Connecticut or expanding in any way, simply because they're afraid that to do so would doom them to remaining in the conference for the rest of eternity?

Could it be possible that they are sabotaging Aresco's efforts?


.

Or is it possible that it's Aresco himself who is Mr. Passivity, Mr. Take-No-Action, in this situation? Is he afraid of what might happen if he does something bold like thinking outside the box for a change?

=====================================================
.

Whatever the cause is, here are two bold steps (call them "Plan A" and "Plan B") that could have brought Boise State Broncos football into the American Athletic Conference by the end of 2020 (and could still bring them in - in 2021).



NOTE: While these may be described (facetiously) as "bold steps," the only thing that's really bold about them or that requires the slightest bit of courage is that they would require Commissioner Aresco to pick up the phone, make some calls, and set up some meetings to discuss some possible paths through the minefields of lassitude that all of these "executives" sometimes appear to be far too paralyzed by indecision to even contemplate navigating their way through.


=====================================================

Plan A:

Aresco seeks and obtains the agreement of the AAC and ESPN to bring Boise State into the conference for their first year (or could be two years) as an all-sports member, with a proviso stipulating that Boise State agrees to relocate their BB/olympic sports into another conference no later than the end of their second season in the AAC.


---To prevent them from weaseling out of the deal, there would be a legal provision forcing them to pay a large early exit fine (e.g. $10 million) if they change their mind about staying in the conference after two years.

---This is probably all Boise would need to sign on the dotted line, because it would buy them a year or so to negotiate a deal with the conference of their choice, and it would put the fear of what happens next on the back burner, so they can focus on setting their move into the AAC into motion.

---Would this be feasible? Absolutely. All the conference would be doing is filling the spot that UConn took up before they departed the conference.

---Would ESPN agree to this? They would have no legitimate reason not to agree, since all the AAC would be doing would be seeking to replace UConn, and at no extra cost to the network.

---Moreover, ESPN would be stupid not to agree to it, since it will generate so much additional income to the network without spending any more than they spent on UConn's terrible FB program. They would be getting something for practically nothing.

---Disadvantages to the AAC? None. Zero.

---So why don't we get off our butts and starting making some phone calls to Aresco and our University Presidents to suggest this idea, since they seem far too clueless to think up something as mind-bendingly inventive as this?

(that was a rhetorical question)

=====================================================
Plan B:
Aresco seeks permission from the AAC Presidents to make the following proposal to ESPN (or, if he's feeling particularly bold, one day, he simply picks up the phone and phones his contacts at ESPN on his own volition to discuss the proposal with them, expecting that, if successful, the plan will be approved by the AAC Presidents (crippled as they seem to be, by terminal or cataplectic indecisiveness):


---Either way, he works up the courage (this might take 6-9 months, all by itself, if past is prologue) to pick up the phone and talk with his favorite contact at ESPN, with whom he has negotiated the ESPN-AAC broadcasting agreements, about a way that the AAC and ESPN could persuade Boise State to overcome their hesitation about joining the AAC.

---He makes it clear from the get-go that the AAC is requesting nothing whatsoever, and that the only reason for discussing the idea with the ESPN executive is that it's in the shared interests of the AAC and ESPN to bring Boise State aboard for football as soon as feasible, and before the opportunity passes.

---So the ESPN executive relaxes - knowing that nothing is being asked of him - and says, ok, let's talk about it. So far, so good.

---At this point, if Aresco is as clever as he sometimes seems to be, he says something like this:

---"Basically, we think that, as much as it's in our (the conference's) interest to bring Boise FB aboard, it may be even more in ESPN's interests to do so, if the net impact to their bottom line is sufficiently profitable ("ca-ching!")."

---So the exec says, "alright, what do you have in mind?"

---Aresco continues, "Well, as you know, the main stumbling block that seems to be stopping Boise from making the move is that they would be hit a significant revenue gap if they move their BB/olympic sports into a conference that can't generate at least a fraction of what they their BB revenue would ordinarily be.... They're a State school in a remote, low-income region with a limited endowment, and they just couldn't make ends meet."

---The exec nods, listening intently, and Aresco proceeds to outline the proposal:

---"So, what I've been thinking about is an idea that would be in ESPN's best interests, because it would seal the deal for a move by Boise State FB to the AAC, which we're all eager to see happen and would generate more than enough income for the network to make it worthwhile..."

...."After all, we realize that, in order for this to work, it's going to have to be attractive to the network."

---The exec nods in agreement and says, "ok..."

---"So here's the kind of thing that we think might persuade Boise to get up off the fence:....
.....First, either we - acting on your behalf - or you yourselves at ESPN ("...whichever you would prefer...") would reach out to Boise's President to suggest an idea that might help get things moving."
....."Hopefully, she'll show interest in chatting about it. If so, we then proceed to tell her that we understand that Boise is a State-school in a rural State with limited means, and that one of their major obstacles in joining the AAC would be not only finding a conference that they could consider suitable for their teams, but also a conference that would be able to generate a sufficient revenue stream to make up for their additional travel costs that they would incur if they were to move forward toward joining the AAC as a FB affiliate member."
.
---So far, so good, the executive is still listening and continuing to show interest.
.
---"So, at that point, Boise's President would probably ask something like this: 'That's right - - that's our major hurdle. We have a conference in mind, but the revenue stream wouldn't be sufficient to make it work.'"
.
---"In response, we (or ESPN - it would be their choice) would tell Boise's President that 'there might be a way that we could help the university to overcome that obstacle.' Hopefully, she smiles and says, I'm glad to hear that - - what might that be?"
.
At this point, the Commissioner is half-way there. All he has to do now is wrap up his pitch to the ESPN Executive.
.
---"So at that point, we (or you) would have the opportunity to inform her that the conference and the network are so interested in making this switch to the AAC possible that we see a great deal of wisdom in the idea of working out a special broadcasting relationship with Boise State that would help to offset the loss of broadcasting revenues that they would ordinarily expect to be able to generate from viewership of their conference BB games."
.
---"At this point, we will almost certainly have captivated her interest, and she would, no doubt, ask for a bit more detail about what is being suggested."
.
---The ESPN executive nods and says, "Yes, and what kind of offer might you suggest that we might make to her?"
.
---Aresco responds by saying, "Well, it would be entirely up to you, you know. Our main role in this would be to simply facilitate opening a dialogue between the network and the university. However, we do have a couple of ideas that you might find of interest."
.
---The exec smiles and says, "Please continue." Aresco then says, ok, well, we've run a few numbers, based on our estimates of the increases in Boise's travel costs were they to play football in the AAC, and it appears to us that the likely number is in the $1 million dollar range, give or take $250,000."
.
---No signs of concern on the exec's face at the mention of this amount...in fact, he nods slightly in agreement or says, "That seems like an accurate ballpark number."
.
---Hearing this, Aresco continues by saying, "One of our Universities has considerable expertise in conducting sophisticated econometric analyses in the domain of market research, pertaining specifically to estimating the mathematical relation between broadcasting outlays and viewership potential for live events..."
.
---"They've been applying their expertise on behalf of the conference, and their computations have indicated that there is a high probability that the ratio of outlays to potential viewership (i.e., advertising revnues) is on an accelerating, positive trajectory..."
.
---"Specifically, their estimates suggest that, were a network to outlay a minimal, but sufficient revenue stream to offset the travel costs of a university with a high viewership FB program such as Boise State, it would be extremely likely to recoup that investment and to generate so much additional income that the outlay to the university would soon come to become regarded as a relatively minor business expense..."
.
---"To be more precise, it is estimated that, were it necessary to outlay approximately $1 million per year to compensate for the otherwise prohibitive surge in the university's travel costs would, the increase in network viewership that would be made possible by such an outlay would only represent 20% to 30% of the amount of new viewership-generated revenue to the network in the first year of the university's new broadcasting agreement, alone, with further increases being expected within the next 2-3 years, and a gradual increase in the future revenue trajectory for the network."
.
---"Simply put, our experts have estimated that the anticipated benefits to the network of making it possible for Boise State to play AAC would be many times greater than the business expense itself, and we are enthusiastic about the idea of trying to make something like this possible."
.
---At this point, Aresco has said almost everything that he can say. The ball is about to go into ESPN's court, but he concludes with words such as these: "That's a basic sketch of our suggestion a possible way through this process, which we wanted to share with you, in a nutshell." We're hoping that you might find the idea of interest, and we'd be happy to talk with you about it in more detail, if you'd like to do that."
.
---The ESPN smiles and nods, and says something like "I think that sounds like an idea that's well worth considering. I'd like to give it some further thought and talk it over with my marketing experts, to see if our numbers line up with yours. Let's talk again in a week to touch base, and we'll take it from there."
.
---Commissioner Aresco, pleased at the positive impression his idea has received, expresses his gladness at the prospect of at least having further conversations about the idea. He adds something like this to emphasize the cooperative and non-demanding nature of the proposal:
---"Of course, we realize that, with your considerable expertise in this area, it's entirely possible that you've had some ideas of your own about how the conference and the network might be able to find a way through the impasse (the one that has prevented Boise State from moving toward a formal agreement to join the AAC by now)."
.
---"We'd like to do anything that we can to work with you, or to assist you along these lines. Please let me know if there's anything that we can do to help get the ball rolling. For example, I'd be happy to set aside time and staff resources to help you brainstorm some strategies or to help coordinate your contacts with the university."
.
---"We're prepared to do anything that we can to try to bring Boise State aboard (optionally adding, as an aside, "...realizing as we all do that the window of opportunity may or may not stay open much longer.").
.
---The exec responds with a few words like, "Well, I'm glad that you brought this up... Maybe this idea will give us the inspiration that we need to give it another try. It sure would be great if we can get the Broncos on board!."
---The business of the day being completed, the pleasantries start to wind down. The conversation shifts to banter about sports, mutual interests, their families or mutual friends. The meeting has ended well, and has been met with a positive response. The ball is now in ESPN's court.
---Of course, Aresco is keen to make something happen, and isn't going to let this potential deal die on the vine. He's going to be back in touch with his ESPN contacts, and is going to pull every string that he can get his hands on to make this work, because he knows that he may never get another opportunity to see his Strategic Plan for the American Athletic Conference shift into high gear.
(This post was last modified: 01-09-2021 01:34 PM by jedclampett.)
01-09-2021 12:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.