Moreover, this complaint is only going to come across as being pathetic when folks point out that - - from all appearances - - neither he nor
the conference has taken any proactive steps to replace Connecticut.
He's had over a year, already, and what news does he have to report on that topic? Zilch. Bupkis.
The best way to get into the CFP is for the AAC to stop ignoring its (moribund, on the shelf, so-called) strategic plan to become a power conference.
(12-18-2020 11:33 AM)Foreverandever Wrote: Remarkably the national press has been reinforcing Aresco's point and calling out the bias. Of course in a back room of p5 members that won't change anything, but it seems pretty clear the public opinion is on his side.
I strongly agree with Aresco's suggestion to revert to the BCS bowl system, which is a constructive suggestion, and constructive criticism, which has been reported elsewhere.
My only beef with Aresco is that his penchant to pipe up from time to time with pro-AAC statements to the press, and to function as the conference's cheerleader, isn't enough. We need bold action to replace Connecticut and to kick-start the conference's strategic plan - - not just bold and supportive words.
Moreover, this complaint is only going to come across as being pathetic when folks point out that - - from all appearances - - neither he nor
the conference has taken any proactive steps to replace Connecticut.
He's had over a year, already, and what news does he have to report on that topic? Zilch. Bupkis.
The best way to get into the CFP is for the AAC to stop ignoring its (moribund, on the shelf, so-called) strategic plan to become a power conference.
Villanova fans sure are interested in the AAC dragging ourselves down with a hurried up add for no viable reason.
Remarkably the national press has been reinforcing Aresco's point and calling out the bias. Of course in a back room of p5 members that won't change anything, but it seems pretty clear the public opinion is on his side.
Aresco has done a pretty good job beating the drum. So many fans want him to kick and scream. He can't overplay his hand. Yes he made a stink with UCF being left out. Now he is going harder with UC. UC was never getting in, but it will help
get the conversation going. I think it is quite the coup just to get the national media on AAC's side. He is playing the long game folks.
Now if he could just get us a decent media deal.
Well he played a good "hey I'm just trying to make this work out so everyone understands" role while UCF played the rebel alliance attacking the death star like shooting a womp rat on tatooine.
I don't think Cincinnati has as bombastic an AD to really get the heat turned up as UCF did. So now it's more like a tag team match, get in make hits, get out, double team whenever you can and beat the committee into submission while keeping them pinned in your corner.
But it seems he has turned the crowd and we'll play the baby face for this feud. I just want to see Tulsa play Arn Anderson and hustle out from behind the curtain with that trusty crowbar.
Moreover, this complaint is only going to come across as being pathetic when folks point out that - - from all appearances - - neither he nor
the conference has taken any proactive steps to replace Connecticut.
He's had over a year, already, and what news does he have to report on that topic? Zilch. Bupkis.
The best way to get into the CFP is for the AAC to stop ignoring its (moribund, on the shelf, so-called) strategic plan to become a power conference.
Villanova fans sure are interested in the AAC dragging ourselves down with a hurried up add for no viable reason.
Remarkably the national press has been reinforcing Aresco's point and calling out the bias. Of course in a back room of p5 members that won't change anything, but it seems pretty clear the public opinion is on his side.
Assuming that you're not a Villanova or Big East fan, who the bleep cares what the Villanova fans are interested in?
For that matter, who on a FB thread on the AAC's message board cares about Villanova's (FCS) FB team?
(This post was last modified: 12-18-2020 02:22 PM by Foreverandever.)
Moreover, this complaint is only going to come across as being pathetic when folks point out that - - from all appearances - - neither he nor
the conference has taken any proactive steps to replace Connecticut.
He's had over a year, already, and what news does he have to report on that topic? Zilch. Bupkis.
The best way to get into the CFP is for the AAC to stop ignoring its (moribund, on the shelf, so-called) strategic plan to become a power conference.
Villanova fans sure are interested in the AAC dragging ourselves down with a hurried up add for no viable reason.
Remarkably the national press has been reinforcing Aresco's point and calling out the bias. Of course in a back room of p5 members that won't change anything, but it seems pretty clear the public opinion is on his side.
Aresco has done a pretty good job beating the drum. So many fans want him to kick and scream. He can't overplay his hand. Yes he made a stink with UCF being left out. Now he is going harder with UC. UC was never getting in, but it will help
get the conversation going. I think it is quite the coup just to get the national media on AAC's side. He is playing the long game folks.
Now if he could just get us a decent media deal.
Well he played a good "hey I'm just trying to make this work out so everyone understands" role while UCF played the rebel alliance attacking the death star like shooting a womp rat on tatooine.
I don't think Cincinnati has as bombastic an AD to really get the heat turned up as UCF did. So now it's more like a tag team match, get in make hits, get out, double team whenever you can and beat the committee into submission while keeping them pinned in your corner.
But it seems he has turned the crowd and we'll play the baby face for this feud. I just want to see Tulsa play Arn Anderson and hustle out from behind the curtain with that trusty crowbar.
I agree with the notion that, regarding Aresco in 2017, the situation with UCF was a bit different than what we have now with Cincy. Aresco did not push for UCF to get in to the playoffs, but at the time UCF was around #12 in the CFP so that just wasn't a realistic possibility. Now, being ranked as high as #7, Cincy is definitely more in the mix, so Aresco is speaking out more.
Also, let's face it, people do learn. Maybe Aresco regrets not speaking out more for UCF in 2017/2018. Maybe he has come to think he was a bit too deferential to the power structure then, and so is speaking out more now.
You seem to assume that, because I've been so critical of the lack of action to replace Connecticut, due to the inaction of Aresco or the AAC leadership (Presidents, etc.), I must be a troll and a Big East fan.
That kind of reasoning is a "false syllogism," of the following type:
"Some mammals live in the water.
All sharks live in the water.
Therefore, some mammals are sharks."
In the present case, the false syllogism appears to be:
"Some people write very critical comments on websites.
All trolls write very critical comments on websites.
Therefore, all people who make very critical comments on websites are trolls."
However, some of the most passionate fans of a team, a program, or a conference are those who are most openly critical of those teams, programs, or conferences.
I can understand why some who haven't give it much thought might question my team and conference loyalties, since I have been even more critical of my alma mater's teams than I have been of the conference. However, most of those who've read my posts on a variety of topics realize that as critical as I have been (of the AAC's failure to replace UConn, of my favorite FB and BB teams), my criticism - - although mordant/incisive at times - - has been of the constructive type or have at least had a constructive intent.
In addition, I tend to write provocatively, because provocative writing can make for spicy, entertaining reading, and because I want people to think over what I'm saying (else, why write anything at all?).
Hope you don't take any offense. None is intended!
You seem to assume that, because I've been so critical of the lack of action to replace Connecticut, due to the inaction of Aresco or the AAC leadership (Presidents, etc.), I must be a troll and a Big East fan.
That kind of reasoning is a "false syllogism," of the following type:
"Some mammals live in the water.
All sharks live in the water.
Therefore, some mammals are sharks."
In the present case, the false syllogism appears to be:
"Some people write very critical comments on websites.
All trolls write very critical comments on websites.
Therefore, all people who make very critical comments on websites are trolls."
However, some of the most passionate fans of a team, a program, or a conference are those who are most openly critical of those teams, programs, or conferences.
It's pertient to mention that I have been on good terms with other fans of my alma mater's (Temple) teams, because I've made it clear to them that, when I have been critical, my criticisms have been addressed to things that we are hoping may change for the better. When there is good news to share, I have written about that. For example, I've written two recent posts sharing good recruiting news and good news about the 2020-21 eligibility of our three new transfers. Fortunately, the team may have a chance to win more than a tiny handful of games this season, and to contend for tournament play in 2021-22.
I can understand why some who haven't give it much thought might question my team and conference loyalties, since I have been even more critical of my alma mater's teams than I have been of the conference. However, most of those who've read my posts on a variety of topics realize that as critical as I have been (of the AAC's failure to replace UConn, of my favorite FB and BB teams), my criticism - - although mordant/incisive at times - - has been of the constructive type or have at least had a constructive intent.
In addition, I tend to write provocatively, because provocative writing can make for spicy, entertaining reading, and because I want people to think over what I'm saying (else, why write anything at all?).
Hope you don't take any offense. None is intended!
You seem to assume that, because I've been so critical of the lack of action to replace Connecticut, due to the inaction of Aresco or the AAC leadership (Presidents, etc.), I must be a troll and a Big East fan.
That kind of reasoning is a "false syllogism," of the following type:
"Some mammals live in the water.
All sharks live in the water.
Therefore, some mammals are sharks."
In the present case, the false syllogism appears to be:
"Some people write very critical comments on websites.
All trolls write very critical comments on websites.
Therefore, all people who make very critical comments on websites are trolls."
However, some of the most passionate fans of a team, a program, or a conference are those who are most openly critical of those teams, programs, or conferences.
It's pertient to mention that I have been on good terms with other fans of my alma mater's (Temple) teams, because I've made it clear to them that, when I have been critical, my criticisms have been addressed to things that we are hoping may change for the better. When there is good news to share, I have written about that. For example, I've written two recent posts sharing good recruiting news and good news about the 2020-21 eligibility of our three new transfers. Fortunately, the team may have a chance to win more than a tiny handful of games this season, and to contend for tournament play in 2021-22.
I can understand why some who haven't give it much thought might question my team and conference loyalties, since I have been even more critical of my alma mater's teams than I have been of the conference. However, most of those who've read my posts on a variety of topics realize that as critical as I have been (of the AAC's failure to replace UConn, of my favorite FB and BB teams), my criticism - - although mordant/incisive at times - - has been of the constructive type or have at least had a constructive intent.
In addition, I tend to write provocatively, because provocative writing can make for spicy, entertaining reading, and because I want people to think over what I'm saying (else, why write anything at all?).
Hope you don't take any offense. None is intended!
Not the set of premsis I used just so we're clear. Nice strawman though. You have been working on it for a while, crafting it clearly with its general tone applicable for whenever the occasion arose. A +1 for preparedness, it was largely wasted on me unfortunately. A Pony reply perhaps would have been better for it. Maybe try it out again in a few weeks?
You seem to assume that, because I've been so critical of the lack of action to replace Connecticut, due to the inaction of Aresco or the AAC leadership (Presidents, etc.), I must be a troll and a Big East fan.
That kind of reasoning is a "false syllogism," of the following type:
"Some mammals live in the water.
All sharks live in the water.
Therefore, some mammals are sharks."
In the present case, the false syllogism appears to be:
"Some people write very critical comments on websites.
All trolls write very critical comments on websites.
Therefore, all people who make very critical comments on websites are trolls."
However, some of the most passionate fans of a team, a program, or a conference are those who are most openly critical of those teams, programs, or conferences.
It's pertient to mention that I have been on good terms with other fans of my alma mater's (Temple) teams, because I've made it clear to them that, when I have been critical, my criticisms have been addressed to things that we are hoping may change for the better. When there is good news to share, I have written about that. For example, I've written two recent posts sharing good recruiting news and good news about the 2020-21 eligibility of our three new transfers. Fortunately, the team may have a chance to win more than a tiny handful of games this season, and to contend for tournament play in 2021-22.
I can understand why some who haven't give it much thought might question my team and conference loyalties, since I have been even more critical of my alma mater's teams than I have been of the conference. However, most of those who've read my posts on a variety of topics realize that as critical as I have been (of the AAC's failure to replace UConn, of my favorite FB and BB teams), my criticism - - although mordant/incisive at times - - has been of the constructive type or have at least had a constructive intent.
In addition, I tend to write provocatively, because provocative writing can make for spicy, entertaining reading, and because I want people to think over what I'm saying (else, why write anything at all?).
Hope you don't take any offense. None is intended!
Not the set of premsis I used just so we're clear. Nice strawman though. You have been working on it for a while, crafting it clearly with its general tone applicable for whenever the occasion arose. A +1 for preparedness, it was largely wasted on me unfortunately. A Pony reply perhaps would have been better for it. Maybe try it out again in a few weeks?
cool. Maybe some other people also thought I was a Villanova troll (though they are my Owls main bb rivals!), so it was good to clear the air.
Moreover, this complaint is only going to come across as being pathetic when folks point out that - - from all appearances - - neither he nor
the conference has taken any proactive steps to replace Connecticut.
He's had over a year, already, and what news does he have to report on that topic? Zilch. Bupkis.
The best way to get into the CFP is for the AAC to stop ignoring its (moribund, on the shelf, so-called) strategic plan to become a power conference.
Villanova fans sure are interested in the AAC dragging ourselves down with a hurried up add for no viable reason.
Remarkably the national press has been reinforcing Aresco's point and calling out the bias. Of course in a back room of p5 members that won't change anything, but it seems pretty clear the public opinion is on his side.
Aresco has done a pretty good job beating the drum. So many fans want him to kick and scream. He can't overplay his hand. Yes he made a stink with UCF being left out. Now he is going harder with UC. UC was never getting in, but it will help
get the conversation going. I think it is quite the coup just to get the national media on AAC's side. He is playing the long game folks.
Now if he could just get us a decent media deal.
Well he played a good "hey I'm just trying to make this work out so everyone understands" role while UCF played the rebel alliance attacking the death star like shooting a womp rat on tatooine.
I don't think Cincinnati has as bombastic an AD to really get the heat turned up as UCF did. So now it's more like a tag team match, get in make hits, get out, double team whenever you can and beat the committee into submission while keeping them pinned in your corner.
But it seems he has turned the crowd and we'll play the baby face for this feud. I just want to see Tulsa play Arn Anderson and hustle out from behind the curtain with that trusty crowbar.
I agree with the notion that, regarding Aresco in 2017, the situation with UCF was a bit different than what we have now with Cincy. Aresco did not push for UCF to get in to the playoffs, but at the time UCF was around #12 in the CFP so that just wasn't a realistic possibility. Now, being ranked as high as #7, Cincy is definitely more in the mix, so Aresco is speaking out more.
Also, let's face it, people do learn. Maybe Aresco regrets not speaking out more for UCF in 2017/2018. Maybe he has come to think he was a bit too deferential to the power structure then, and so is speaking out more now.
I think he plays the hand he is dealt. He'll push whatever we tell him to sell, but I think he didn't have as much to work with in 2017 just on history. Now though with the conference overall performance, UCF being denied in 2017 and 2018 after a ridiculous unbeaten streak, the position Cincy worked itself into this year and the tone deafness of the committee make the situation different. I also think White was perfect to rub it in everyone's faces in a slightly sheltered position. Aresco has to politic with the committee and other conferences much more than a school AD the fans loved.
You seem to assume that, because I've been so critical of the lack of action to replace Connecticut, due to the inaction of Aresco or the AAC leadership (Presidents, etc.), I must be a troll and a Big East fan.
That kind of reasoning is a "false syllogism," of the following type:
"Some mammals live in the water.
All sharks live in the water.
Therefore, some mammals are sharks."
In the present case, the false syllogism appears to be:
"Some people write very critical comments on websites.
All trolls write very critical comments on websites.
Therefore, all people who make very critical comments on websites are trolls."
However, some of the most passionate fans of a team, a program, or a conference are those who are most openly critical of those teams, programs, or conferences.
It's pertient to mention that I have been on good terms with other fans of my alma mater's (Temple) teams, because I've made it clear to them that, when I have been critical, my criticisms have been addressed to things that we are hoping may change for the better. When there is good news to share, I have written about that. For example, I've written two recent posts sharing good recruiting news and good news about the 2020-21 eligibility of our three new transfers. Fortunately, the team may have a chance to win more than a tiny handful of games this season, and to contend for tournament play in 2021-22.
I can understand why some who haven't give it much thought might question my team and conference loyalties, since I have been even more critical of my alma mater's teams than I have been of the conference. However, most of those who've read my posts on a variety of topics realize that as critical as I have been (of the AAC's failure to replace UConn, of my favorite FB and BB teams), my criticism - - although mordant/incisive at times - - has been of the constructive type or have at least had a constructive intent.
In addition, I tend to write provocatively, because provocative writing can make for spicy, entertaining reading, and because I want people to think over what I'm saying (else, why write anything at all?).
Hope you don't take any offense. None is intended!
Not the set of premsis I used just so we're clear. Nice strawman though. You have been working on it for a while, crafting it clearly with its general tone applicable for whenever the occasion arose. A +1 for preparedness, it was largely wasted on me unfortunately. A Pony reply perhaps would have been better for it. Maybe try it out again in a few weeks?
cool. Maybe some other people also thought I was a Villanova troll (though they are my Owls main bb rivals!), so it was good to clear the air.
This of course is about money. If they put a G5 in playoffs all these P5 conf have to justify their big tv contracts. If a G5 gets in P5 afraid Espn will question the ridiculous money they are paying them and wonder if a cheap G5 can make it, why pay out the big money to these.clowns.
(12-19-2020 04:43 PM)baruna falls Wrote: This of course is about money. If they put a G5 in playoffs all these P5 conf have to justify their big tv contracts. If a G5 gets in P5 afraid Espn will question the ridiculous money they are paying them and wonder if a cheap G5 can make it, why pay out the big money to these.clowns.
It's not the getting in, it's the chance that a G5 might win, or worst of all win the whole thing. G5 gets its brains beat in that's what we all expect, but when you have to play the game maybe you don't win, then it's all blown up, then reality not want is in control.
That's what they won't risk, the opportunity that a Cincy or UCF takes someone to the woodshed and/or wins a close game and suddenly they are a real national contender.
I think its more simple than that. Its about brands, tradition, money, and ratings. The theory is that the best ratings and, as a consequence---the most CFP revenue----comes only if the best brands are in the playoff. The P5 loves that theory because it means their conferences get the big money--AND---it tells the top recruits that ONLY the P5 can ever reach the playoff (thus making the whole "theory" essentially self sustaining). If the P5 can keep the playoff as an exclusive P5 invitational---then it means the top field ready plug and play recruits will only consider P5 schools---continuing the overall talent imbalance.
But if a G5 school can reach the playoff---then it because arguable that a top recruit has a better chance of making the playoff via one of the top G5 programs going undefeated than he does at someplace like Mississippi State or Texas Tech--where Alabama or Oklahoma is always in the way. That shift in attitude changes not only access--but the talent distribution in the leagues.....and that means, eventually, the P5 share of the money will change as well at some point.
(This post was last modified: 12-19-2020 05:54 PM by Attackcoog.)
Pacifist Irish are rolling over yet again in the national spotlight. The committee can’t put them in after yet another performance like this. No offense Tulsa but I hope Cincy rolls you by 50+ to prove a point.
(12-19-2020 06:33 PM)PirateJP Wrote: Pacifist Irish are rolling over yet again in the national spotlight. The committee can’t put them in after yet another performance like this. No offense Tulsa but I hope Cincy rolls you by 50+ to prove a point.
If you are a neutral AAC fan you should logically rooting for Cincinnati. That's just the way the stupid system is rigged. We all agree its messed up and we're trying to break it.
(12-19-2020 06:33 PM)PirateJP Wrote: Pacifist Irish are rolling over yet again in the national spotlight. The committee can’t put them in after yet another performance like this. No offense Tulsa but I hope Cincy rolls you by 50+ to prove a point.
If you are a neutral AAC fan you should logically rooting for Cincinnati. That's just the way the stupid system is rigged. We all agree its messed up and we're trying to break it.
I will give the announcers during the ACC Championship game being honest that the current system will never allow a G5 conference in. I was shocked at the honesty. Also, saying they could see where 6-0 Big 10 that played far less game should be discussed by the CFP. I was amazed they still thought ND will be in, neither OSU or ND deserve the spots. Cinci and A&M probably should get those spots but I will not be shocked to see OSU vs Clemson and ND vs Alabama.
(12-19-2020 06:33 PM)PirateJP Wrote: Pacifist Irish are rolling over yet again in the national spotlight. The committee can’t put them in after yet another performance like this. No offense Tulsa but I hope Cincy rolls you by 50+ to prove a point.
If you are a neutral AAC fan you should logically rooting for Cincinnati. That's just the way the stupid system is rigged. We all agree its messed up and we're trying to break it.
I will give the announcers during the ACC Championship game being honest that the current system will never allow a G5 conference in. I was shocked at the honesty. Also, saying they could see where 6-0 Big 10 that played far less game should be discussed by the CFP. I was amazed they still thought ND will be in, neither OSU or ND deserve the spots. Cinci and A&M probably should get those spots but I will not be shocked to see OSU vs Clemson and ND vs Alabama.
ND can't be smoked like that and be in consideration for the #4 spot.
I think its more simple than that. Its about brands, tradition, money, and ratings. The theory is that the best ratings and, as a consequence---the most CFP revenue----comes only if the best brands are in the playoff. The P5 loves that theory...
Yep, that's their theory.
But that theory was proven wrong, once and for all, on January 15, 1967, in a match-up between the "best brand" (the NFL) and an upstart league (the AFL), which had struggled to remain in existence through its first 5 seasons, with average attendance of less than 20,000 per game, like some of today's G5 conferences .
Game: SUPER BOWL I
Top Brand: The National Football League (NFL; 47th Season)
Represented By: Green Bay Packers (46th Season)
Lower Tier Brand: The American Football League (AFL; 7th Season)
--Some said the AFL was more akin to the Canadian Football League than to the NFL
Represented By: Kansas City Chiefs (4th Season) Largest Viewership Share (79) in the history of professional football!
That was it for the "best brand." The NFL's next move was to buy out the AFL, lock, stock, and barrel, accepting the truism, "if ya' can't beat 'em, join 'em!"
(This post was last modified: 12-20-2020 04:53 AM by jedclampett.)
I think its more simple than that. Its about brands, tradition, money, and ratings. The theory is that the best ratings and, as a consequence---the most CFP revenue----comes only if the best brands are in the playoff. The P5 loves that theory...
Yep, that's their theory.
But that theory was proven wrong, once and for all, on January 15, 1967, in a match-up between the "best brand" (the NFL) and an upstart league (the AFL), which had struggled to remain in existence through its first 5 seasons, with average attendance of less than 20,000 per game, like some of today's G5 conferences .
There are some key differences. First, in 1965, the NFL television deal was worth about $1 million per team, per year. The AFL deal was for about $500,000 per team, per year. So while the NFL was twice as valuable, that is way, way closer than what we see today with the P5 vs the G5, where the P5 deals average about $35 million per school per year while the G5 are getting around $3 million per school, per year. The AFL was far, far closer to the NFL in "national interest" than the G5 is compared to the P5 today.
Also, the AFL teams were bankrolled by some very rich individuals, and were bidding up salaries, particularly on star players and big draft picks. They were competing head to head for talent with the NFL and this was hitting the NFL owners in their wallets hard by driving up labor costs. That's really what forced the merger. The G5 simply cannot do that.
(This post was last modified: 12-20-2020 09:08 AM by quo vadis.)
(12-19-2020 06:33 PM)PirateJP Wrote: Pacifist Irish are rolling over yet again in the national spotlight. The committee can’t put them in after yet another performance like this. No offense Tulsa but I hope Cincy rolls you by 50+ to prove a point.
If you are a neutral AAC fan you should logically rooting for Cincinnati. That's just the way the stupid system is rigged. We all agree its messed up and we're trying to break it.
I will give the announcers during the ACC Championship game being honest that the current system will never allow a G5 conference in. I was shocked at the honesty. Also, saying they could see where 6-0 Big 10 that played far less game should be discussed by the CFP. I was amazed they still thought ND will be in, neither OSU or ND deserve the spots. Cinci and A&M probably should get those spots but I will not be shocked to see OSU vs Clemson and ND vs Alabama.
ND can't be smoked like that and be in consideration for the #4 spot.
The problem is A&M got destroyed by Bama. This whole thing is a joke.
![[Image: tenor.gif?itemid=10313618]](https://media1.tenor.com/images/81ac8063ac529eb0eeeafc6e5f05b4f5/tenor.gif?itemid=10313618)
