(01-19-2020 03:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-19-2020 03:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-19-2020 01:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-19-2020 11:41 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-19-2020 02:07 AM)Sactowndog Wrote:  Fair enough. Thanks for the assessment. To answer your question the MWC Presidents believed the Boise dollars would pay off when Boise made the access bowl. They have not made it for a number of years. I also speculate the Boise deal is hindering other schools ability to retain top coaches as other coaches don’t want to stay and play on an uneven playing field.

The net of the situation is Thompson has never been a Commissioner to make idle threats. If he is saying this 6 years are the last of Boise’s special treatment it’s because the Presidents want it that way. As some have stated, you can’t force people to stay in a contract forever.

I agree with you, I doubt Thompson just made this comment off-the-cuff independent of a push from the other members. Heck if he had, he would have had to quickly retract it. But we haven't gotten a retraction.

So given that his comment expressed the will of the membership, it amazes me that the membership doesn't realize how important Boise is to the MW, how the MW would go from being benchmarked vs the AAC to being benchmarked vs the Sun Belt. It's as if they want out of the contract so bad they are goading Boise to leave, which IMO would be cutting off their nose to spite their face.

Even if Boise hasn't brought in the dollars the others hoped for, their symbolic/brand value alone is much more significant to the MW than the members seem to realize. Dumb.

Agree. I suspect that Thompson's comments reflect the will of the membership. I also think the membership has no real ability to carry out that course of action due to the contractual language of the term sheet. My question would be---why deliver a message publicly? The same desire by the membership to phase out the special Boise deal has no doubt been discussed in face to face closed meetings among the membership (including Boise). So, if we can assume Boise is aware of the desire----why say it in public? Thats the real question.

The reason to deliver the message publicly would be to goad Boise in to leaving. The membership surely knows that they don't have the power to change the language of the contract, but if Boise chooses to exit themselves well then that ends the contract.

I am starting to suspect that the membership finds the deal so odious that they want Boise gone. Incrediblly dumb IMO, but that is the only thing that comports with the public comment.

Or its a bluff that they hope will result in Boise agreeing to further modification of the deal. The bottom line is MW pocketbooks are thicker with Boise in the fold. It's one thing if its a bluff---its another thing completely if they are truly attempting to push Boise into leaving. To quote John Grisham's "The Rain Maker", the latter option would just be "stupid stupid stupid".

It shows that none of what the MWC has done makes sense!

Let’s say that the MWC actually *is* trying to get Boise State to leave. Not only would that be stupid... the fact that the MWC is breaching its contract with Boise State means that Boise State could likely leave without paying any exit fees.

So, the MWC would rather make less money AND let Boise State exit for free because of some wounded pride over Boise State getting a bonus that barely covers the salary of a head coach? I guess that could happen when satisfying egos means more than even money... but WOW would that be stupid.