Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Prospective expansion question
Author Message
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 34,732
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1802
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #41
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:  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.

If you read the emails, its pretty clear Boise is fine with football only IF they can find a place to put their sports. The emails make it clear they are not done with pursuing the WWC after the Covid crisis eases---and as Ive mentioned---the state of the WAC has substantially changed since September---so its possible the WAC, which is never mentioned in the emails, could potentially be a third option (WAC speculation is simply conjecture on my part---but its fairly reasonable conjecture). 04-cheers
(This post was last modified: 01-09-2021 01:16 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-09-2021 01:15 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,322
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #42
RE: Prospective expansion question
You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
01-09-2021 02:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,765
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 124
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #43
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 01:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(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:  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.

If you read the emails, its pretty clear Boise is fine with football only IF they can find a place to put their sports. The emails make it clear they are not done with pursuing the WWC after the Covid crisis eases---and as Ive mentioned---the state of the WAC has substantially changed since September---so its possible the WAC, which is never mentioned in the emails, could potentially be a third option (WAC speculation is simply conjecture on my part---but its fairly reasonable conjecture). 04-cheers

Aye, and there are other basketball mavens around the country who have expressed similar thoughts on dedicated websites.
01-09-2021 03:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 34,732
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1802
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #44
RE: Prospective expansion question
If this C Austin Cox tweet is actually true (which, frankly--this move would be a smart and reasonable reaction by MW schools)---that may be the end of the Boise interest in leaving the MW.


C. Austin Cox
@CAustinCox
·
7h
Several MW schools have agreed to "soften" on Boise State retaining its separate football rights, per the same source from last Jan. SDSU is still the loudest voice of opposition to BSU getting an extra $1.8MM/year, separate from other MW members for home football games.
01-09-2021 05:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,777
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 537
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #45
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 12:38 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(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:  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.
You forgot the Plan C where Aresco gets Boise State to relocate their university to Kansas...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
01-09-2021 05:43 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,777
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 537
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #46
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
"You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
01-09-2021 05:46 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,322
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #47
RE: Prospective expansion question
If I’m the MWC I’m not budging a bit on Boise. If Smurf Turf is going to pursue AAC football, force them to torpedo the rest of the athletic dept in the process. San Diego St is right to take a hard stance on this.
01-09-2021 05:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,586
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 236
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #48
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 05:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  If this C Austin Cox tweet is actually true (which, frankly--this move would be a smart and reasonable reaction by MW schools)---that may be the end of the Boise interest in leaving the MW.


C. Austin Cox
@CAustinCox
·
7h
Several MW schools have agreed to "soften" on Boise State retaining its separate football rights, per the same source from last Jan. SDSU is still the loudest voice of opposition to BSU getting an extra $1.8MM/year, separate from other MW members for home football games.

As has been pointed out multiple times, this was always what Boise was after.

As to them getting in the WCC who won't even answer their calls or emails?

03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao

Apparently no one wants their Olympics unless they will pay millions
01-09-2021 05:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,322
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 199
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location:
Post: #49
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 05:46 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
"You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

In a 16 team AAC Temple and SDSU would rarely meet.
01-09-2021 05:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 34,732
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1802
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #50
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 05:46 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
"You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Just because mighty Georgia State games draw about as many folks to Neck Cracker Stadium as two old guys playing checkers in the park doesnt mean that cross country AAC games would do the same. As it is---its not like UCF fans fill Houston's stadium when the two play--nor do Houston fans fill UCF's stadium. The AAC is so spread out that we pretty much exclusively rely on our own fan bases to fill our stadiums. Thus, games against cross country foes likely wouldnt affect ticket sales at all. Though---I would think that name recognition of the better known western teams like Boise or BYU might sell at least a few extra tickets--especially if they are having a good year.
(This post was last modified: 01-09-2021 07:29 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-09-2021 07:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoOwls111 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,457
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Owls
Location: NYC
Post: #51
RE: 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.

The way that I see it with BYU... Either they have Really dumb leadership or have no intention of joining a conference... They can just as easily join another form the AAC as they can from being independent, probably easier launching pad from AAC... Money is not an issue for ESPiN to add those 3,my guess is ESPiN has no interest of propping the AAC any further than we have done on our own.

It costs ESPiN coffee money to make it happen, I believe that we stay at 11 unless forced to do otherwise
01-09-2021 07:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
slhNavy91 Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,971
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 524
I Root For: Navy
Location:
Post: #52
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 07:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 05:46 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
"You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Just because mighty Georgia State games draw about as many folks to Neck Cracker Stadium as two old guys playing checkers in the park doesnt mean that cross country AAC games would do the same. As it is---its not like UCF fans fill Houston's stadium when the two play--nor do Houston fans fill UCF's stadium. The AAC is so spread out that we pretty much exclusively rely on our own fan bases to fill our stadiums. Thus, games against cross country foes likely wouldnt affect ticket sales at all. Though---I would think that name recognition of the better known western teams like Boise or BYU might sell at least a few extra tickets--especially if they are having a good year.

Right.
Remember the debates about UCF drawing a hard line on home and homes vs two for ones? They cited $2M per home game. Sounds about right - Navy is around $1.5M probably with ticket revenue, concessions, parking, sponsorship, etc.
BYU would add fans to any AAC stadium. BYU isn't interested for their own srategic reasons.
Army or Air Force? Less than BYU, but their fanbases are national. Do military appreciation marketing and you'll get a bump.
Boise? Meh. Yes a recognizable brand, and ESPN loves them. But there won't be a far flung blue and orange army filling AAC stadia. Marginal gain from casual local fans recognizing the brand name.
Any of the CUSA or SunBelt teams that would dilute the conference brand? Probably a net negative.
Back to the numbers...for most AAC programs that home game revenue is as much or more than the conference media money. That's even true for autonomy conferences with their far larger media money. TV partners would prefer a nine game SEC schedule, but having a seventh home game most years, even against a cupcake, is still worth more to most of them. Comparing the calculus of 30k per AAC home game to 18k for CUSA or SunBelt - even with our greater media money - is yet another example of why discussions that lump the AAC into "G5" are flawed.
01-09-2021 08:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
1845 Bear Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 4,568
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation: 140
I Root For: Baylor
Location:
Post: #53
Prospective expansion question
Outside of the SEC opposing fans won’t average a ton over a league schedule. Home fans is the main driver.
01-09-2021 09:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,586
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 236
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #54
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 08:22 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 07:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 05:46 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
"You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Just because mighty Georgia State games draw about as many folks to Neck Cracker Stadium as two old guys playing checkers in the park doesnt mean that cross country AAC games would do the same. As it is---its not like UCF fans fill Houston's stadium when the two play--nor do Houston fans fill UCF's stadium. The AAC is so spread out that we pretty much exclusively rely on our own fan bases to fill our stadiums. Thus, games against cross country foes likely wouldnt affect ticket sales at all. Though---I would think that name recognition of the better known western teams like Boise or BYU might sell at least a few extra tickets--especially if they are having a good year.

Right.
Remember the debates about UCF drawing a hard line on home and homes vs two for ones? They cited $2M per home game. Sounds about right - Navy is around $1.5M probably with ticket revenue, concessions, parking, sponsorship, etc.
BYU would add fans to any AAC stadium. BYU isn't interested for their own srategic reasons.
Army or Air Force? Less than BYU, but their fanbases are national. Do military appreciation marketing and you'll get a bump.
Boise? Meh. Yes a recognizable brand, and ESPN loves them. But there won't be a far flung blue and orange army filling AAC stadia. Marginal gain from casual local fans recognizing the brand name.
Any of the CUSA or SunBelt teams that would dilute the conference brand? Probably a net negative.
Back to the numbers...for most AAC programs that home game revenue is as much or more than the conference media money. That's even true for autonomy conferences with their far larger media money. TV partners would prefer a nine game SEC schedule, but having a seventh home game most years, even against a cupcake, is still worth more to most of them. Comparing the calculus of 30k per AAC home game to 18k for CUSA or SunBelt - even with our greater media money - is yet another example of why discussions that lump the AAC into "G5" are flawed.

As usual on the money. Boise is helpful to ESPN and Boise, its debatable how much it helps the conference. Nobody else below Boise would do anything. Even a SDSU type add is flat and basically is a fill in place holder that doesn't drag to hard. The first three are the best options.
01-09-2021 09:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,777
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 537
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #55
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 05:50 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 05:46 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
"You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

In a 16 team AAC Temple and SDSU would rarely meet.
What's the point of a league where you have to schedule to avoid half the league?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
(This post was last modified: 01-09-2021 11:20 PM by panama.)
01-09-2021 11:20 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panama Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 28,777
Joined: May 2009
Reputation: 537
I Root For: Georgia STATE
Location: East Atlanta Village
Post: #56
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 09:18 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 08:22 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 07:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 05:46 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 02:24 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones...unless they know that the Big 12 is likely to be gutted in 2024 and the best of the AAC is likely to be moving on.

If I had to hazard a guess, in 2024 the Big 12 is going to be retuned as the nation’s tweener conference.
"You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Just because mighty Georgia State games draw about as many folks to Neck Cracker Stadium as two old guys playing checkers in the park doesnt mean that cross country AAC games would do the same. As it is---its not like UCF fans fill Houston's stadium when the two play--nor do Houston fans fill UCF's stadium. The AAC is so spread out that we pretty much exclusively rely on our own fan bases to fill our stadiums. Thus, games against cross country foes likely wouldnt affect ticket sales at all. Though---I would think that name recognition of the better known western teams like Boise or BYU might sell at least a few extra tickets--especially if they are having a good year.

Right.
Remember the debates about UCF drawing a hard line on home and homes vs two for ones? They cited $2M per home game. Sounds about right - Navy is around $1.5M probably with ticket revenue, concessions, parking, sponsorship, etc.
BYU would add fans to any AAC stadium. BYU isn't interested for their own srategic reasons.
Army or Air Force? Less than BYU, but their fanbases are national. Do military appreciation marketing and you'll get a bump.
Boise? Meh. Yes a recognizable brand, and ESPN loves them. But there won't be a far flung blue and orange army filling AAC stadia. Marginal gain from casual local fans recognizing the brand name.
Any of the CUSA or SunBelt teams that would dilute the conference brand? Probably a net negative.
Back to the numbers...for most AAC programs that home game revenue is as much or more than the conference media money. That's even true for autonomy conferences with their far larger media money. TV partners would prefer a nine game SEC schedule, but having a seventh home game most years, even against a cupcake, is still worth more to most of them. Comparing the calculus of 30k per AAC home game to 18k for CUSA or SunBelt - even with our greater media money - is yet another example of why discussions that lump the AAC into "G5" are flawed.

As usual on the money. Boise is helpful to ESPN and Boise, its debatable how much it helps the conference. Nobody else below Boise would do anything. Even a SDSU type add is flat and basically is a fill in place holder that doesn't drag to hard. The first three are the best options.
And none are coming.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
01-09-2021 11:21 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,586
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 236
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #57
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 11:21 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 09:18 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 08:22 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 07:28 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 05:46 PM)panama Wrote:  "You’d think a Coast-to-Coast AAC would be in the best interest for ESPN and they’d be inclined to financially incentivize it’s creation to provide them some quality content from all of the time zones"

Don't they already have that and what happens when SDSU plays Temple on TV in front of 5k fans?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Just because mighty Georgia State games draw about as many folks to Neck Cracker Stadium as two old guys playing checkers in the park doesnt mean that cross country AAC games would do the same. As it is---its not like UCF fans fill Houston's stadium when the two play--nor do Houston fans fill UCF's stadium. The AAC is so spread out that we pretty much exclusively rely on our own fan bases to fill our stadiums. Thus, games against cross country foes likely wouldnt affect ticket sales at all. Though---I would think that name recognition of the better known western teams like Boise or BYU might sell at least a few extra tickets--especially if they are having a good year.

Right.
Remember the debates about UCF drawing a hard line on home and homes vs two for ones? They cited $2M per home game. Sounds about right - Navy is around $1.5M probably with ticket revenue, concessions, parking, sponsorship, etc.
BYU would add fans to any AAC stadium. BYU isn't interested for their own srategic reasons.
Army or Air Force? Less than BYU, but their fanbases are national. Do military appreciation marketing and you'll get a bump.
Boise? Meh. Yes a recognizable brand, and ESPN loves them. But there won't be a far flung blue and orange army filling AAC stadia. Marginal gain from casual local fans recognizing the brand name.
Any of the CUSA or SunBelt teams that would dilute the conference brand? Probably a net negative.
Back to the numbers...for most AAC programs that home game revenue is as much or more than the conference media money. That's even true for autonomy conferences with their far larger media money. TV partners would prefer a nine game SEC schedule, but having a seventh home game most years, even against a cupcake, is still worth more to most of them. Comparing the calculus of 30k per AAC home game to 18k for CUSA or SunBelt - even with our greater media money - is yet another example of why discussions that lump the AAC into "G5" are flawed.

As usual on the money. Boise is helpful to ESPN and Boise, its debatable how much it helps the conference. Nobody else below Boise would do anything. Even a SDSU type add is flat and basically is a fill in place holder that doesn't drag to hard. The first three are the best options.
And none are coming.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Which is fine, it seems more and more likely a permanent rule change will be coming, if not we will have off balanced schedules with 5/6 divisions. Of those three teams really BYU is the only one who we would expect to year in year out help elevate the conference. The Academies would be more up and down. More important than any add is the current members to continue to progress in football and overall competitiveness in all sports but men's basketball in particular.
01-09-2021 11:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fishpro10987 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 855
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #58
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-09-2021 05:43 PM)panama Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 12:38 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  
(01-09-2021 08:27 AM)TripleA Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:17 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(01-07-2021 01:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  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.
You forgot the Plan C where Aresco gets Boise State to relocate their university to Kansas...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Appreciate the update. It is hard to follow all this. Keep me posted.
01-09-2021 11:31 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TripleA Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,858
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1907
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:

Memphis Hall of Fame
Post: #59
RE: Prospective expansion question
Good grief. I've got a beef with words that take up fifteen pages in one post.
01-10-2021 01:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fishpro10987 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 855
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 54
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #60
RE: Prospective expansion question
(01-10-2021 01:31 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Good grief. I've got a beef with words that take up fifteen pages in one post.

Perhaps a bandwith charge over a certain word limit is is order. Have the mods ever discussed this?
01-10-2021 02:04 AM
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.