(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW TV deal. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Then both sides of every bowl are theoretically "open" if he talking about the next bowl cycle. We don't own the Frisco Bowl anymore and I doubt we have any interest in keeping the tie after the current agreement expires. Its a bowl with $100K payout in a 20K soccer stadium on the outskirts of Arlington. I think the AAC will go after the Armed Forces Bowl (P5 tie), the Heart of Dallas Bowl (P5 tie), and NOLA Bowl (perhaps vs the SB champ) as their western bowl options in the next bowl cycle. Based on nothing more than conference footprints---my guess is Frsico will become a SB vs CUSA. That makes the most sense. That said, the MW could probably land it if they really want it.

(05-13-2017 11:40 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Then both sides of every bowl are theoretically "open" if he talking about the next bowl cycle. We don't own the Frisco Bowl anymore and I doubt we have any interest in keeping the tie after the current agreement expires. Its a bowl with $100K payout in a 20K soccer stadium on the outskirts of Arlington. I think the AAC will go after the Armed Forces Bowl (P5 tie), the Heart of Dallas Bowl (P5 tie), and NOLA Bowl (perhaps vs the SB champ) as their western bowl options in the next bowl cycle. Based on nothing more than conference footprints---my guess is Frsico will become a SB vs CUSA. That makes the most sense. That said, the MW could probably land it if they really want it.

Will be interesting to see if the AAC gets the "P5" match-ups. Those Bowls are all doable.

the Holliday Bowl at one point was the premier Bowl for the WAC, and was very well known. Then it raised its profile, and now is in decline. It is essential for the MW to either resign the Las Vegas Bowl with a higher level Pac 12 opponent, or get the Holliday Bowl back against a Pac 12 opponent. Time will tell.

I still want an AAC vs MW champion match-up every year. Whether it is the first or second place team, it is possible for both teams to be ranked each year.

(05-12-2017 07:53 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 05:02 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 04:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  No offense but I will say this was idea was floated Gator, both Orlando, outback Bowl in last negotiation. Needless to say it failed, my view they were concerned about the ACC being to weak and being odd man out in the P5. I am just saying, I would not be surprise if another run happens if the ACC repeats its success the next two years. Not saying it will happen.

The ACC schools simply doesn't bring fans to bowls like the Big 10, SEC and Big 12. I go to bowls...it is what it is. A 6-6 Iowa St will bring 15,000 fans to the Liberty Bowl or Texas Bowl. 13 out of the 14 ACC schools would bring 100 (BC, Pitt, Wake) to 1,000 fans (the rest except Louisville) It is what it is, you guys dont travel well to bowls...at all.

Hard to believe an ECU fan would make such a statement. You very well know FSU, Clemson, VA Tech, UNC, NCSU along with ND tie-in bring fans as well as Louisville. Also, bowls are more about TV sadly than fans. Miami and BC have TV draw and Duke is starting too, thanks to Cutcliffe and K. Have OU and Tx equal to FSU and Clemson. I think the remaining stack up well with the other 8 of the B12. If you recall, the 6 bowl alliance is what I recommended. B12 is dropped from the Orlando bowl. I said the 9 was the example since you could easily extract six. Again, I wish the AAC well in tie-ins Champs, Liberty or Texas bowl in the next go round.

For bowls and traveling fans you have FSU and Clemson = OU and Texas.---? Do you go to bowls?? Also, your comment about "hard to believe an ECU would make such a statement." Who better than an ECU fan to know which schools in the region travel and which ones don't? Sorry son, but Miami and Duke are not known for traveling to bowls like the Big 10 and Big 12 schools. Big 12 bottom dweller Iowa St would bring more fans to a bowl game in Texas than Miami. This is a comical argument. You've got to be kidding me?

(05-13-2017 03:09 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 07:53 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 05:02 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 04:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  No offense but I will say this was idea was floated Gator, both Orlando, outback Bowl in last negotiation. Needless to say it failed, my view they were concerned about the ACC being to weak and being odd man out in the P5. I am just saying, I would not be surprise if another run happens if the ACC repeats its success the next two years. Not saying it will happen.

The ACC schools simply doesn't bring fans to bowls like the Big 10, SEC and Big 12. I go to bowls...it is what it is. A 6-6 Iowa St will bring 15,000 fans to the Liberty Bowl or Texas Bowl. 13 out of the 14 ACC schools would bring 100 (BC, Pitt, Wake) to 1,000 fans (the rest except Louisville) It is what it is, you guys dont travel well to bowls...at all.

Hard to believe an ECU fan would make such a statement. You very well know FSU, Clemson, VA Tech, UNC, NCSU along with ND tie-in bring fans as well as Louisville. Also, bowls are more about TV sadly than fans. Miami and BC have TV draw and Duke is starting too, thanks to Cutcliffe and K. Have OU and Tx equal to FSU and Clemson. I think the remaining stack up well with the other 8 of the B12. If you recall, the 6 bowl alliance is what I recommended. B12 is dropped from the Orlando bowl. I said the 9 was the example since you could easily extract six. Again, I wish the AAC well in tie-ins Champs, Liberty or Texas bowl in the next go round.

For bowls and traveling fans you have FSU and Clemson = OU and Texas.---? Do you go to bowls?? Also, your comment about "hard to believe an ECU would make such a statement." Who better than an ECU fan to know which schools in the region travel and which ones don't? Sorry son, but Miami and Duke are not known for traveling to bowls like the Big 10 and Big 12 schools. Big 12 bottom dweller Iowa St would bring more fans to a bowl game in Texas than Miami. This is a comical argument. You've got to be kidding me?

Apparently, your helping showing why the other NC universities say EZU for their academics. I said Miami, BC and Duke appears to be getting name recognition for TV ratings. Traveling fan base were FSU, Clemson, Louisville, Va Tech, UNC, NCSU and ND for fan travel. If you truly know the region, you know this is a fact. I started going to bowls since 1986. I know ECU is probably one of the best AAC fan bases, it appears you would be able to admit the truth about the ACC fan bases that do travel Skippy.

(05-13-2017 11:40 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Then both sides of every bowl are theoretically "open" if he talking about the next bowl cycle. We don't own the Frisco Bowl anymore and I doubt we have any interest in keeping the tie after the current agreement expires. Its a bowl with $100K payout in a 20K soccer stadium on the outskirts of Arlington. I think the AAC will go after the Armed Forces Bowl (P5 tie), the Heart of Dallas Bowl (P5 tie), and NOLA Bowl (perhaps vs the SB champ) as their western bowl options in the next bowl cycle. Based on nothing more than conference footprints---my guess is Frsico will become a SB vs CUSA. That makes the most sense. That said, the MW could probably land it if they really want it.

Ha! I see you are still looking to pry the HOD from C-USA. I can understand you wanting it, but I don't see it happening. I think the AAC has a good chance at the Armed Forces. I could see that bowl rotating between Army and the AAC, which means the AAC would have it most seasons. But, I don't see the AAC getting both of the good G5 bowls in DFW. The HOD seems to enjoy their association with C-USA. I don't see that changing. Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane just can't generate enough interest for this bowl. The Frisco Bowl is a better fit for half of the AAC West programs.

(05-14-2017 03:53 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 03:09 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 07:53 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 05:02 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 04:46 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  No offense but I will say this was idea was floated Gator, both Orlando, outback Bowl in last negotiation. Needless to say it failed, my view they were concerned about the ACC being to weak and being odd man out in the P5. I am just saying, I would not be surprise if another run happens if the ACC repeats its success the next two years. Not saying it will happen.

The ACC schools simply doesn't bring fans to bowls like the Big 10, SEC and Big 12. I go to bowls...it is what it is. A 6-6 Iowa St will bring 15,000 fans to the Liberty Bowl or Texas Bowl. 13 out of the 14 ACC schools would bring 100 (BC, Pitt, Wake) to 1,000 fans (the rest except Louisville) It is what it is, you guys dont travel well to bowls...at all.

Hard to believe an ECU fan would make such a statement. You very well know FSU, Clemson, VA Tech, UNC, NCSU along with ND tie-in bring fans as well as Louisville. Also, bowls are more about TV sadly than fans. Miami and BC have TV draw and Duke is starting too, thanks to Cutcliffe and K. Have OU and Tx equal to FSU and Clemson. I think the remaining stack up well with the other 8 of the B12. If you recall, the 6 bowl alliance is what I recommended. B12 is dropped from the Orlando bowl. I said the 9 was the example since you could easily extract six. Again, I wish the AAC well in tie-ins Champs, Liberty or Texas bowl in the next go round.

For bowls and traveling fans you have FSU and Clemson = OU and Texas.---? Do you go to bowls?? Also, your comment about "hard to believe an ECU would make such a statement." Who better than an ECU fan to know which schools in the region travel and which ones don't? Sorry son, but Miami and Duke are not known for traveling to bowls like the Big 10 and Big 12 schools. Big 12 bottom dweller Iowa St would bring more fans to a bowl game in Texas than Miami. This is a comical argument. You've got to be kidding me?

Apparently, your helping showing why the other NC universities say EZU for their academics. I said Miami, BC and Duke appears to be getting name recognition for TV ratings. Traveling fan base were FSU, Clemson, Louisville, Va Tech, UNC, NCSU and ND for fan travel. If you truly know the region, you know this is a fact. I started going to bowls since 1986. I know ECU is probably one of the best AAC fan bases, it appears you would be able to admit the truth about the ACC fan bases that do travel Skippy.

First off, it's not only ACC fans who call it EZU. AAC fans do too.
ACC teams that travel well to bowls:
Louisville--Always travel well.
Virginia Tech--Usually travel very well
UNC--Not that great. There were bowls with UNC with attendance in the 20,000's
NCSU--Pretty good traveling fans for bowls; has had some duds and a very bad showing recently.
FSU--travels great to Florida Bowls. Put them out of Florida? Not always a safe bet. Used to get a lot of locals slap on t-shirts at the Bowls.
Clemson --has been hit and miss in the past, but usually and lately, they travel very well.
Georgia Tech: have struggled some years on traveling Bowl support.
Notre Dame-I don't count ND as an ACC member in football, because they aren't. It's irrelevant.
Miami:fans don't travel well outside of Florida. Local Bowl t-shirt fans have made them look way better over the past 3 decades.
Pitt, Wake, Duke, BC, Cuse, Virginia: Have had very below average showings at Bowls.
So skippy, do you remember the 1992 Peach Bowl (91 season) featuring our schools?
How about the 1988 Peach where Iowa played NCSU? That was kind of a dud for me. More Iowans showed up for the WAC Holiday Bowls than this one..I don't know why.

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Well the interviewer's were Boise St focus.

Also, did you catch his comment the we also have a backup to the SF Bowl...didn't know that. Maybe its nothing because it seems it's a bowl that will always be filled.

(05-14-2017 06:52 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Well the interviewer's were Boise St focus.

Also, did you catch his comment the we also have a backup to the SF Bowl...didn't know that. Maybe its nothing because it seems it's a bowl that will always be filled.

Is that the bowl that had 10k Max between Indiana & Utah? Hahahah Yeah, if I were them I'd rather have the MWC with its 3 Cali schools plus nearby Nevada and Boise of course..

(05-14-2017 06:52 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Well the interviewer's were Boise St focus.

Also, did you catch his comment the we also have a backup to the SF Bowl...didn't know that. Maybe its nothing because it seems it's a bowl that will always be filled.

Yeah. Lol...kinda like our Liberty Bowl backup. The Liberty has a high enough pick that its pretty much never going unfilled. Its about as valuable as a back up tie to the Sugar Bowl.

(05-14-2017 05:34 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:40 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Then both sides of every bowl are theoretically "open" if he talking about the next bowl cycle. We don't own the Frisco Bowl anymore and I doubt we have any interest in keeping the tie after the current agreement expires. Its a bowl with $100K payout in a 20K soccer stadium on the outskirts of Arlington. I think the AAC will go after the Armed Forces Bowl (P5 tie), the Heart of Dallas Bowl (P5 tie), and NOLA Bowl (perhaps vs the SB champ) as their western bowl options in the next bowl cycle. Based on nothing more than conference footprints---my guess is Frsico will become a SB vs CUSA. That makes the most sense. That said, the MW could probably land it if they really want it.

Ha! I see you are still looking to pry the HOD from C-USA. I can understand you wanting it, but I don't see it happening. I think the AAC has a good chance at the Armed Forces. I could see that bowl rotating between Army and the AAC, which means the AAC would have it most seasons. But, I don't see the AAC getting both of the good G5 bowls in DFW. The HOD seems to enjoy their association with C-USA. I don't see that changing. Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane just can't generate enough interest for this bowl. The Frisco Bowl is a better fit for half of the AAC West programs.

The Bowl hasn't been around long---but it doesn't look to me like they are liking that CUSA tie much if N Texas isn't in the bowl.

2014---LaTech-31K vs a P5
2015---S Miss---20K vs a P5

2012-UH--47K vs a P5

That's all there is. However, we could use the Armed Forces Bowl, which is also in Dallas, as a proxy for the likely performance of AAC teams in the HOD Bowl---

2006-Tulsa vs Utah 32K
2008-Houston vs AF 41K
2009-Houston vs AF 41K (lol, how's that for consistency)
2010-SMU vs Army 36K
2011-Tulsa vs BYU 30K
2013-Navy vs MTSU--39K (lol--who gets credit for this one?)
2014-Houston vs Pitt-38K

Seems to me that even the small AAC schools do as well or better than the CUSA schools not named N Texas. No AAC schools saw attendance as low as the 20K a CUSA team brought playing against a P5. The AAC seems to have an attendance edge----but lets give you every benefit of the doubt and call attendance a draw. If that's the case, TV ratings might make a big difference here since ESPN is now calling the shots at the HOD. I wonder which conference they might prefer if ratings are the deciding factor? Just food for thought.

AC, here are the list of the ESPN owned Bowls. I think to say the main football properities for ESPN are SEC, B10, ACC with the AAC being the big dog of G5.

I did current tie-ins from memory.
Armed Forces Bowl (Not really sure how the academy tie-ins work, but AAC and MWC I believe are backups vs B10/B12)
Birmingham Bowl (SEC vs AAC)
Bahamas Bowl (Rotating G5)
Boca Raton Bowl (Rotating G5)
Camellia Bowl (Mac vs SB)
Celebration Bowl (FCS BOWL)
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl (G5 bowl)
Frisco Bowl (AAC vs G5)
Hawaiʻi Bowl (G5 Bowl)
Heart of Dallas Bowl(CUSA vs B10/B12)
Las Vegas Bowl (2001–present) (MWC vs PAC 12)
New Mexico Bowl (G5)
St. Petersburg Bowl (AAC vs part Time ACC & CUSA)
Texas Bowl (SEC vs B12)

Again, the ACC may be AAC biggest competitor for some ESPN bowls.
ACC I think will show interest in the following bowls
In Texas - Would like to get HOD vs B12 (Willing to move into Mid Tier)
or Frisco Bowl vs AAC (Drop St. Pete but move ahead of Detroit in lower Tier)
In addition, the ACC may show interest in Birmingham if Indy remains last pick for SEC.

Now I think AAC vs SEC in Indy bowl with MWC as backup would be good.
See the AAC holding the tie-in for AF vs B10, still not sure how they handle Academies? I think it makes sense for AF and Army have tie-ins with MWC having backup those years and B10 having Army Backup.

The question, what about the none ESPN owned bowls? I think that will be the challenge. I think the Military has an excellent AAC relationship but say the B10 and ACC have been wanting a DC matchup, would that be tempting if they agreed to #7 picks? Will the Liberty want to give up B12 for AAC to play the SEC? Just like I think the ACC should aim high, so should the AAC but both have to realize what their up against.

The good news, the new tie-ins really want take place until after the 2018 season. It gives both conferences time to show what they can do or continue doing. As I said previously, the ACC has set itself well in the first three years but could easily destroy it in the next two by missing on the CFP twice. The AAC could be NYD the next two and blowout the bowl opponents the next two years, having 3 of 5 G5 Champion Bowl slots. No matter how much we hope, it will be the results that decide all this.

(05-15-2017 10:54 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  AC, here are the list of the ESPN owned Bowls. I think to say the main football properities for ESPN are SEC, B10, ACC with the AAC being the big dog of G5.

I did current tie-ins from memory.
Armed Forces Bowl (Not really sure how the academy tie-ins work, but AAC and MWC I believe are backups vs B10/B12)
Birmingham Bowl (SEC vs AAC)
Bahamas Bowl (Rotating G5)
Boca Raton Bowl (Rotating G5)
Camellia Bowl (Mac vs SB)
Celebration Bowl (FCS BOWL)
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl (G5 bowl)
Frisco Bowl (AAC vs G5)
Hawaiʻi Bowl (G5 Bowl)
Heart of Dallas Bowl(CUSA vs B10/B12)
Las Vegas Bowl (2001–present) (MWC vs PAC 12)
New Mexico Bowl (G5)
St. Petersburg Bowl (AAC vs part Time ACC & CUSA)
Texas Bowl (SEC vs B12)

Again, the ACC may be AAC biggest competitor for some ESPN bowls.
ACC I think will show interest in the following bowls
In Texas - Would like to get HOD vs B12 (Willing to move into Mid Tier)
or Frisco Bowl vs AAC (Drop St. Pete but move ahead of Detroit in lower Tier)
In addition, the ACC may show interest in Birmingham if Indy remains last pick for SEC.

Now I think AAC vs SEC in Indy bowl with MWC as backup would be good.
See the AAC holding the tie-in for AF vs B10, still not sure how they handle Academies? I think it makes sense for AF and Army have tie-ins with MWC having backup those years and B10 having Army Backup.

The question, what about the none ESPN owned bowls? I think that will be the challenge. I think the Military has an excellent AAC relationship but say the B10 and ACC have been wanting a DC matchup, would that be tempting if they agreed to #7 picks? Will the Liberty want to give up B12 for AAC to play the SEC? Just like I think the ACC should aim high, so should the AAC but both have to realize what their up against.

The good news, the new tie-ins really want take place until after the 2018 season. It gives both conferences time to show what they can do or continue doing. As I said previously, the ACC has set itself well in the first three years but could easily destroy it in the next two by missing on the CFP twice. The AAC could be NYD the next two and blowout the bowl opponents the next two years, having 3 of 5 G5 Champion Bowl slots. No matter how much we hope, it will be the results that decide all this.

In general, I doubt any G5 conference beats out a P5 conference for a bowl tie (mainly because no bowl exec ever gets fired for signing a P5 vs P5 deal).

That said, geography tends to have a say. Playing the Big12 or Big10 in Texas isn't that appealing to ACC fan bases or to bowl ticket sales. With their new 14 team configurations---the ACC vs B10 in DC makes a lot more sense than the same matchup in Texas. So, Id expect the AAC would lose a P5 bowl game there if the B10 and ACC got interested in the Military Bowl.

In Texas, the HOD and Ft Worth bowls make sense for Big12 and Big10 to play there vs G5's. Its convenient and a relatively easy drive for many fan bases in both conferences. The G5 opponent works because its a very short drive for many AAC and CUSA G5 schools--so they have showed well in those games. That said--if the B12 and B10 decided to pick one of those two bowls and just play one another in it---then 2 more P5 vs G5 bowl games would probably drop off the board because that makes geographical sense.

Im optimistic that the AAC can generate incremental improvement for its post season. I can see a way to add another 2-3 G5 vs P5 bowls to the AAC bowl line along with a fun destination by adding the NOLA Bowl. The AAC would then be in a position to drop its least attractive bowls. We'd end up with 4-5 bowl games every year vs P5's (mostly all 6-7 win type teams) and a lower end G5 bowl in Orlando and New Orleans. Not great---but a incremental improvement over the current mess.

On the other hand---this could go completely sideways and we could end up with no P5 games if the Big10 and Big12 choose to play each other in Texas and the B10 and ACC do the same in DC.

AC,
Your logic makes sense. But remember, the ACC plays in El Paso vs the PAC 12. I would not see multiple games, but I do see the ACC wanting to get a game in the Dallas area. Logical, it would be against the B12 not the B10, why I think they make a play for HOD. Also, it takes from CUSA not the AAC. If they fail, as I stated, I could see Frisco replace St. Pete vs AAC. I do think the ACC and B10 will try to make Military happen in the next cycle. I think that could move to Mid-Tier with lower tier being
Frisco vs AAC
Indy vs MWC
Detroit vs B10

(05-14-2017 11:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-14-2017 05:34 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:40 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 11:31 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW rights deals. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

Interviewers missed on TV contract follow up, as well as the future of the Las Vegas Bowl.

Regarding your first comment, Thompson was talking about when the bowl negotiations are next up. he is not talking about 2017-2018

Then both sides of every bowl are theoretically "open" if he talking about the next bowl cycle. We don't own the Frisco Bowl anymore and I doubt we have any interest in keeping the tie after the current agreement expires. Its a bowl with $100K payout in a 20K soccer stadium on the outskirts of Arlington. I think the AAC will go after the Armed Forces Bowl (P5 tie), the Heart of Dallas Bowl (P5 tie), and NOLA Bowl (perhaps vs the SB champ) as their western bowl options in the next bowl cycle. Based on nothing more than conference footprints---my guess is Frsico will become a SB vs CUSA. That makes the most sense. That said, the MW could probably land it if they really want it.

Ha! I see you are still looking to pry the HOD from C-USA. I can understand you wanting it, but I don't see it happening. I think the AAC has a good chance at the Armed Forces. I could see that bowl rotating between Army and the AAC, which means the AAC would have it most seasons. But, I don't see the AAC getting both of the good G5 bowls in DFW. The HOD seems to enjoy their association with C-USA. I don't see that changing. Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane just can't generate enough interest for this bowl. The Frisco Bowl is a better fit for half of the AAC West programs.

The Bowl hasn't been around long---but it doesn't look to me like they are liking that CUSA tie much if N Texas isn't in the bowl.

2014---LaTech-31K vs a P5 (vs. Illinois)
2015---S Miss---20K vs a P5 (vs. Washington)

2012-UH--47K vs a P5 (vs. Penn State)

That's all there is. However, we could use the Armed Forces Bowl, which is also in Dallas, as a proxy for the likely performance of AAC teams in the HOD Bowl---

2006-Tulsa vs Utah 32K
2008-Houston vs AF 41K
2009-Houston vs AF 41K (lol, how's that for consistency)
2010-SMU vs Army 36K
2011-Tulsa vs BYU 30K
2013-Navy vs MTSU--39K (lol--who gets credit for this one?)
2014-Houston vs Pitt-38K

Seems to me that even the small AAC schools do as well or better than the CUSA schools not named N Texas. No AAC schools saw attendance as low as the 20K a CUSA team brought playing against a P5. The AAC seems to have an attendance edge----but lets give you every benefit of the doubt and call attendance a draw. If that's the case, TV ratings might make a big difference here since ESPN is now calling the shots at the HOD. I wonder which conference they might prefer if ratings are the deciding factor? Just food for thought.

I glad you posted these numbers. But, I see them a little different then you. Yes, LA Tech and Southern Miss didn't draw well at the HOD, but those programs are not very close to Dallas. In fact LA Tech and Tulsa are both about 260 miles from DFW, and both had around 31-32K in attendance. So I think that is a wash.

Southern Miss is almost 500 miles from Dallas. Tulsa, Houston, and SMU are all much closer. Having said that, USM still should have posted better attendance numbers for their bowl against Washington. North Texas has posted very respectable attendance numbers at the HOD, and we still have not seen them reach their peak. I really hope North Texas lands the HOD this season against the BIG12. If that actually happens, I believe that game will set a new HOD attendance record. I'm almost certain UTSA, and UTEP would bring better attendance to the HOD then Tulsa, Tulane, and probably even SMU and Memphis.

All I really see in your numbers is the fact that the service academies attract big crowds to bowl games, and Houston can draw crowds when they play a P5 team in a Texas bowl game.

Having said that... I still see the Armed Forces Bowl being a stronger possibility for the AAC. I can't see both the Armed Forces and HOD wanting to sign with the AAC, when the only AAC West programs that can bring sizable crowds to DFW are Houston and Navy. I think the HOD would rather stay with C-USA, where North Texas will continue to bring solid attendance, and UTSA, and UTEP can bring respectable crowds when they get selected. The Frisco Bowl should be a decent companion bowl for the AAC West's smaller programs.

(05-15-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  AC,
Your logic makes sense. But remember, the ACC plays in El Paso vs the PAC 12. I would not see multiple games, but I do see the ACC wanting to get a game in the Dallas area. Logical, it would be against the B12 not the B10, why I think they make a play for HOD. Also, it takes from CUSA not the AAC. If they fail, as I stated, I could see Frisco replace St. Pete vs AAC. I do think the ACC and B10 will try to make Military happen in the next cycle. I think that could move to Mid-Tier with lower tier being
Frisco vs AAC
Indy vs MWC
Detroit vs B10

There is no chance that the B10 is giving up slot #7 Foster Farms against the PAC 12 to play what would be a 4th game against the ACC in some years at the Military Bowl. I'm skeptical that they'd be willing to send pick #8 to Annapolis. Similarly, the Military Bowl is not severing its relationships with Navy, the other service academies and Northrop Grumman to have, at best, a shot at the B10's next to last bowl eligible team. Navy / Northrop >>>> Rutgers, finding a new title sponsor and a new venue.

The Sun Bowl has strong local support and a guaranteed decent PAC 12 team to anchor attendance. HOD has neither and is played in a much larger stadium.

Regardless, the B12 is not abandoning the Armed Forces Bowl founded and hosted by a conference member featuring well attended games against service academies to play in a largely empty Cotton Bowl against ACC 10/11. There's also the fact that B12 has never had enough bowl eligible teams to fill its slot in the AFB which means the ACC would most likely be sending a 6-6 team to play a G5 in a location ridiculously outside the conference footprint.

St. Pete may be played on a horrible date and time, but its an actual warm weather tourist destination in driveable / cheap flight distance of the ACC's members. Trading a G5 game there for one in DFW is insane.

(05-16-2017 11:20 AM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  AC,
Your logic makes sense. But remember, the ACC plays in El Paso vs the PAC 12. I would not see multiple games, but I do see the ACC wanting to get a game in the Dallas area. Logical, it would be against the B12 not the B10, why I think they make a play for HOD. Also, it takes from CUSA not the AAC. If they fail, as I stated, I could see Frisco replace St. Pete vs AAC. I do think the ACC and B10 will try to make Military happen in the next cycle. I think that could move to Mid-Tier with lower tier being
Frisco vs AAC
Indy vs MWC
Detroit vs B10

There is no chance that the B10 is giving up slot #7 Foster Farms against the PAC 12 to play what would be a 4th game against the ACC in some years at the Military Bowl. I'm skeptical that they'd be willing to send pick #8 to Annapolis. Similarly, the Military Bowl is not severing its relationships with Navy, the other service academies and Northrop Grumman to have, at best, a shot at the B10's next to last bowl eligible team. Navy / Northrop >>>> Rutgers, finding a new title sponsor and a new venue.

The Sun Bowl has strong local support and a guaranteed decent PAC 12 team to anchor attendance. HOD has neither and is played in a much larger stadium.

Regardless, the B12 is not abandoning the Armed Forces Bowl founded and hosted by a conference member featuring well attended games against service academies to play in a largely empty Cotton Bowl against ACC 10/11. There's also the fact that B12 has never had enough bowl eligible teams to fill its slot in the AFB which means the ACC would most likely be sending a 6-6 team to play a G5 in a location ridiculously outside the conference footprint.

St. Pete may be played on a horrible date and time, but its an actual warm weather tourist destination in driveable / cheap flight distance of the ACC's members. Trading a G5 game there for one in DFW is insane.

Most G5 v P5 bowls exist for a reason. Largely, that reason is a good easy to reach location for the P5 that's sending a team to the bowl. I think you have done a good job of explaining why the St Pete, Birmingham, Ft Worth, and HOD make sense for the P5's that play in them. I also think some of the points you make would tend to push those bowls in the AAC direction. I would also think that these P5's would probably lean toward playing more recognizable G5 names like SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Memphis, Cinci, Tulane, and Navy.

(05-16-2017 12:10 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Most G5 v P5 bowls exist for a reason. Largely, that reason is a good easy to reach location for the P5 that's sending a team to the bowl. I think you have done a good job of explaining why the St Pete, Birmingham, Ft Worth, and HOD make sense for the P5's that play in them. I also think some of the points you make would tend to push those bowls in the AAC direction. I would also think that these P5's would probably lean toward playing more recognizable G5 names like SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Memphis, Cinci, Tulane, and Navy.

I hope you're right about the factors favoring the AAC. I agree, but ultimately time will tell.

I wonder if there will be any chance to bring PAC 12 pick #8 into the rotation with the Frisco Bowl. The PAC 12 has sent teams to Ft Worth and HOD in the past. There will be years where they won't have an eligible team but it would at least give them a secure spot within reasonable travel distance in years that they do have an eligible team.

(05-16-2017 02:09 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 12:10 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Most G5 v P5 bowls exist for a reason. Largely, that reason is a good easy to reach location for the P5 that's sending a team to the bowl. I think you have done a good job of explaining why the St Pete, Birmingham, Ft Worth, and HOD make sense for the P5's that play in them. I also think some of the points you make would tend to push those bowls in the AAC direction. I would also think that these P5's would probably lean toward playing more recognizable G5 names like SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Memphis, Cinci, Tulane, and Navy.

I hope you're right about the factors favoring the AAC. I agree, but ultimately time will tell.

I wonder if there will be any chance to bring PAC 12 pick #8 into the rotation with the Frisco Bowl. The PAC 12 has sent teams to Ft Worth and HOD in the past. There will be years where they won't have an eligible team but it would at least give them a secure spot within reasonable travel distance in years that they do have an eligible team.

Truth be told---the conventional wisdom for the Pac12 would be to do what the rest of the P5 does. Just like you outlined, the other P5's have their low end bowl games in convenient places in their footprint. The Pac12 needs a western bowl that's in a nice location within driving distance of several schools. In other words, make it a cheap attractive destination for the 6-6/7-5 type school that will be heading there. A MW opponent would be the logical choice---but if the Pac-12 is tired playing mostly MW G5's-----Im sure the AAC would be more than willing to tie themselves to any bowl with a possible P5 opponent.