Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
Author Message
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #81
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-16-2019 02:25 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I think I would have spent my time visiting with my peers seeing if we can get some traction to amend the legislation to fit the situation if the waiver doesn't happen. I wouldn't hesitate to imply to the Sun Belt, MAC and CUSA that they have members we would evaluate as candidates. If my counting is right you just need two P5's to sign-off to get it passed if you have those three with you.

Would that threat even bother any of those conferences? My guess is that threat would be met with a shrug. None of those three leagues have a "must keep" program like Texas is to the Big 12, or to a lesser extent, as Boise State is to the Mountain West. For that matter, one would think that most of CUSA might have already come to the conclusion that 14 members is more than enough for them, and it wouldn't really harm them if a few moved on.

Even so, I agree that the AAC's best approach would have been to reach out to other conferences to build support for a rule change, as opposed to just announcing that they want an exemption that would allow the AAC (and only the AAC) to hold a CCG with no divisions and no round robin.
10-16-2019 09:04 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #82
Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-16-2019 09:04 PM)Wedge Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 02:25 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I think I would have spent my time visiting with my peers seeing if we can get some traction to amend the legislation to fit the situation if the waiver doesn't happen. I wouldn't hesitate to imply to the Sun Belt, MAC and CUSA that they have members we would evaluate as candidates. If my counting is right you just need two P5's to sign-off to get it passed if you have those three with you.

Would that threat even bother any of those conferences? My guess is that threat would be met with a shrug. None of those three leagues have a "must keep" program like Texas is to the Big 12, or to a lesser extent, as Boise State is to the Mountain West. For that matter, one would think that most of CUSA might have already come to the conclusion that 14 members is more than enough for them, and it wouldn't really harm them if a few moved on.

Even so, I agree that the AAC's best approach would have been to reach out to other conferences to build support for a rule change, as opposed to just announcing that they want an exemption that would allow the AAC (and only the AAC) to hold a CCG with no divisions and no round robin.


Absolutely would matter.

It hurts brand value and creates tension.

Sun Belt lost 5 to CUSA but improved its standing going from rating 10th occasionally 9th among leagues in the computer composite used by BCS and now CFP to ranking 8th and 9th and has increased NCAA units earned plus added a recent national champion in baseball but the raid shapes the perception


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
10-16-2019 10:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,697
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 187
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #83
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-16-2019 01:48 PM)Bogg Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 01:38 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Truthfully, they ought to have to pay all of that money back on top of the exit fees.

Why? That money had nothing to do with the CUSA schools. They weren't stakeholders in the 2005-2013 football conference.

Saw you left the rest of the post out. Did you agree with the rest?
10-17-2019 05:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
usffan Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,021
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 691
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #84
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-16-2019 06:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 05:13 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The AAC has reached equilibrium with UConn gone. With Temple as the exception, it’s a southern league and an assemblage of the best programs outside of the P5 east of the Rockies.

Well outside of Cincy and Navy as well, as they aren't southern programs.

But that nit aside, even the southern aspect is strange, in that it really has no presence in the heart of the south. It's more like a "ring around the south" league, in that the schools are in states that kind of edge around the south. I think, LOL.

I hadn't thought about this until now, but if you look at the Mason Dixon line...

[Image: Mason-and-Dixon-Line.jpg]

Navy is "in the south" and both Temple and Cincinnati are essentially right on the border...

(note, I'm not arguing that either are "southern" programs)

I tend to think hyperregionalization is antiquated in the age of readily available commercial aviation. Temple and USF are separated by a 2 hour flight. This isn't the 50's when most teams used buses or trains to get around.

The biggest athletic programs are big not because of their location but because of their decades of establishing themselves as power brokers, making it really hard for the new kids on the block to get into the club.

USFFan
10-17-2019 09:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,629
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #85
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-16-2019 01:38 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The AAC has every right to be petty and stick it to UConn. They sat and collected exit fee money all this time and when the well dried up they darted.

Truthfully, they ought to have to pay all of that money back on top of the exit fees.

And the AAC, specifically the C-USA call-ups, benefited financially and from an exposure standpoint immensely from joining a new league with remnants of an AQ conference (namely, UConn, Cincinnati and USF). They, too, received value - even if not in terms that those three received from war chest payments as part of the Big East exit fees.

Look, UConn (and Cincinnati and USF) had every right to the war chest and exit fees from the original Big East. They were part of a true power conference (AQ) and were members of the conference that saw other programs pay to leave early (Syracuse, Pittsburgh, West Virginia, Rutgers, Louisville and Notre Dame). Those funds offset the loss in television revenue that those three programs had while as members of the Big East (and which TV revenue dropped when those three programs backfilled with members of C-USA). UConn owes nothing from its war chest funds back to the AAC, as the call-ups from C-USA earned nothing of that money and both Cincinnati and USF were as equally entitled to that allotment as UConn was.

UConn is paying for an exit fee that covers payouts for two seasons. It is more than fair. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2019 09:38 AM by GoldenWarrior11.)
10-17-2019 09:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,797
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #86
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
There’s no question that UConn was injured by the loss of Pitt, Cuse, WVU, ND, Rutgers, and Louisville but that money was meant to stay with the conference. UConn no longer wants to be in that conference.

You have to be joking if you consider association with UConn football a plus for the AAC additions. UConn football is a dumpster fire.
10-17-2019 10:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Carolina_Low_Country Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,425
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 97
I Root For: Go Pirates
Location: ENC
Post: #87
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 09:18 AM)usffan Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 06:27 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 05:13 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The AAC has reached equilibrium with UConn gone. With Temple as the exception, it’s a southern league and an assemblage of the best programs outside of the P5 east of the Rockies.

Well outside of Cincy and Navy as well, as they aren't southern programs.

But that nit aside, even the southern aspect is strange, in that it really has no presence in the heart of the south. It's more like a "ring around the south" league, in that the schools are in states that kind of edge around the south. I think, LOL.

I hadn't thought about this until now, but if you look at the Mason Dixon line...

[Image: Mason-and-Dixon-Line.jpg]

Navy is "in the south" and both Temple and Cincinnati are essentially right on the border...

(note, I'm not arguing that either are "southern" programs)

I tend to think hyperregionalization is antiquated in the age of readily available commercial aviation. Temple and USF are separated by a 2 hour flight. This isn't the 50's when most teams used buses or trains to get around.

The biggest athletic programs are big not because of their location but because of their decades of establishing themselves as power brokers, making it really hard for the new kids on the block to get into the club.

USFFan
Cincinnati is as southern as Louisville, Navy is in Maryland which is an old southern state but does not have southern culture now days but Annapolis has a lot of things in common with southern states. Temple is the outlier now which is fine.

I'm all for Air Fore FB and VCU for all sports that way Wichita State = Air Force in Olympic sports and VCU = Navy based off of location. If Air Force does not work I would do a FB only with App State and add VCU.
10-17-2019 10:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MUsince96 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,112
Joined: Jan 2009
Reputation: 169
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #88
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
If there is any fire to the Air Force smoke of them being unhappy in the MWC and they were to leave for the AAC. And the MWC backfilled with say, UTEP.

I wonder if UConn could negotiate a football only deal with C-USA? Throwing them 2 hoops games a year or something.

Or maybe they can make Independence work. I don't know. Just thinking of scenarios that could make a UConn domino fall.
10-17-2019 10:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,629
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #89
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 10:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  There’s no question that UConn was injured by the loss of Pitt, Cuse, WVU, ND, Rutgers, and Louisville but that money was meant to stay with the conference. UConn no longer wants to be in that conference.

You have to be joking if you consider association with UConn football a plus for the AAC additions. UConn football is a dumpster fire.

Today it is, absolutely. But in 2010, UConn recently had a Fiesta Bowl appearance, and had four consecutive bowl berths. They had won the Big East twice. Their head coach had just gotten hired at Maryland. At that point, Memphis was a train wreck (3-21 from '10-'11), ECU had consecutive losing seasons, Tulane was terrible, UCF and Houston were inconsistent (1st place finishes, followed by losing seasons).

Make no mistake, it was because of UConn, Cincinnati and USF that the AAC was able to make more money and get more exposure than C-USA had, and it was due to the AQ-status those three had while in the Big East that provided more value than what they had in C-USA. Arguing that UConn owes anything to the AAC beyond their exit fees is foolish and shortsighted.

Bottom line, the AAC benefited from having UConn in the league for seven seasons. UConn was compensated in their loss of conference status with exit fees left behind from departing members. Both sides received value from their temporary arrangement.
10-17-2019 10:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 50,019
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #90
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 10:38 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  
(10-17-2019 10:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  There’s no question that UConn was injured by the loss of Pitt, Cuse, WVU, ND, Rutgers, and Louisville but that money was meant to stay with the conference. UConn no longer wants to be in that conference.

You have to be joking if you consider association with UConn football a plus for the AAC additions. UConn football is a dumpster fire.

Today it is, absolutely. But in 2010, UConn recently had a Fiesta Bowl appearance, and had four consecutive bowl berths. They had won the Big East twice. Their head coach had just gotten hired at Maryland. At that point, Memphis was a train wreck (3-21 from '10-'11), ECU had consecutive losing seasons, Tulane was terrible, UCF and Houston were inconsistent (1st place finishes, followed by losing seasons).

Make no mistake, it was because of UConn, Cincinnati and USF that the AAC was able to make more money and get more exposure than C-USA had, and it was due to the AQ-status those three had while in the Big East that provided more value than what they had in C-USA. Arguing that UConn owes anything to the AAC beyond their exit fees is foolish and shortsighted.

Bottom line, the AAC benefited from having UConn in the league for seven seasons. UConn was compensated in their loss of conference status with exit fees left behind from departing members. Both sides received value from their temporary arrangement.

Yes, the notion that UConn (and Cincy or USF) was not entitled to the exit fees is absurd.

And as you said, schools like UCF and Houston and Memphis could have remained with C-USA or returned to it at any time. They joined the Big East/AAC because they knew it was a big step up for them.
10-17-2019 11:11 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Senior Chief Realignmentologist
*

Posts: 11,797
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 789
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Biden Cesspool
Post: #91
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 10:38 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  
(10-17-2019 10:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  There’s no question that UConn was injured by the loss of Pitt, Cuse, WVU, ND, Rutgers, and Louisville but that money was meant to stay with the conference. UConn no longer wants to be in that conference.

You have to be joking if you consider association with UConn football a plus for the AAC additions. UConn football is a dumpster fire.

Today it is, absolutely. But in 2010, UConn recently had a Fiesta Bowl appearance, and had four consecutive bowl berths. They had won the Big East twice. Their head coach had just gotten hired at Maryland. At that point, Memphis was a train wreck (3-21 from '10-'11), ECU had consecutive losing seasons, Tulane was terrible, UCF and Houston were inconsistent (1st place finishes, followed by losing seasons).

Make no mistake, it was because of UConn, Cincinnati and USF that the AAC was able to make more money and get more exposure than C-USA had, and it was due to the AQ-status those three had while in the Big East that provided more value than what they had in C-USA. Arguing that UConn owes anything to the AAC beyond their exit fees is foolish and shortsighted.

Bottom line, the AAC benefited from having UConn in the league for seven seasons. UConn was compensated in their loss of conference status with exit fees left behind from departing members. Both sides received value from their temporary arrangement.

That Fiesta Bowl was the product of being the shiniest of 8 turds. Going in as an unranked 8-4 team and getting thumped is hardly an accomplishment.

UConn football has been awful ever since and their basketball has been pathetic since the split when arguably they should have been the standard bearer but instead other programs had to step up and carry their dead weight. Any value from Storrs is purely in name recognition.

The Huskies have been a leech, a pouty whiny leech.
10-17-2019 11:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DustMyBroom Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 450
Joined: Nov 2018
Reputation: 52
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location:
Post: #92
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-16-2019 12:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 09:35 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(10-15-2019 03:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-15-2019 10:30 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  
(10-14-2019 03:18 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I definitely don't believe that UConn should be expecting anything at all from the AAC. It was UConn's choice to leave and, even though I believe that the school will ultimately be better off for the move, they have to deal with the consequences no matter how painful it might be scheduling-wise for the next couple of years.

On the other hand, I've been continually perplexed by the overconfidence (at least publicly) from Mike Aresco that the NCAA is going to grant the outcome that the AAC truly wants, which is essentially to change the conference championship game qualification rules entirely to allow for something less than a full conference round robin for 11 schools. Even if there is a MAC-type waiver where there are 2 divisions that are playing less than a division round robin, that waiver had always been stipulated as a temporary stopgap. The MAC was clear that they didn't want the situation to be permanent and were looking to change its membership composition. In contrast, the AAC is preemptively stating that they don't want to expand, which would effectively mean that they want whatever waiver that is granted by the NCAA to be permanent. I really don't think the NCAA is going to do that here. Even very recent history (most particularly the rebuffing of the ACC's attempt to remove any divisional requirement for conference championship games) says that the NCAA's membership is much more conservative regarding the conference championship game rules than the fans seem to be.

The upshot is that if the NCAA only grants a temporary waiver (which is the MAC precedent), then the AAC is still going to need to find a 12th football member regardless of whether Aresco and the AAC members want one or not. From that perspective, which 12th football member that the AAC could *realistically* add (e.g. BYU and Army are NOT realistic) that would add or at least maintain financial value? There might be a long list of football *teams* better than UConn out there in the MAC/C-USA/Sun Belt, but we all should know that conference realignment isn't really about on-the-field prowess. Instead, is there really a *school* better than UConn out there, even when we're just talking about a football-only membership? This is where the bridges between UConn and the AAC may not necessarily have been burned.

Look - if I were personally running either UConn or the AAC, I would want the divorce to be final. So, I'm not saying that UConn staying the AAC as a football-only member is a great idea in a vacuum. However, circumstances make strange bedfellows. The AAC can't really know how to move until it actually receives a verification from the NCAA of what the AAC is allowed to do regarding a conference championship game (and it may not be allowed to as much as it would like).

Same the AAC commissioner needs to stop dragging his feet about this. The NCAA should deny this waiver because all they will be doing is green-lighting prolonged instability for 3-4 conferences.

Just add UAB/Boise/Fantasy team. Then let CUSA & UConn work out a deal to replace UAB on the CUSA schedule. Heck, they can even join CUSA as a football only team which would be ideal for them IMO.

Draggin his feet? He's made his request. He nor the conference has any business doing anything else until the NCAA makes a decision.

Yeah, I don't think Aresco is dragging his feet since it's the ball is in the NCAA's court at this point. My main issue with Aresco is his frequent habit of over-promising and under-delivering. His public comments about a waiver make it seem like a simple formality that is essentially guaranteed to get approved, whereas the stark reality is that the ACC was shot down just a couple of years ago for essentially what Aresco is asking for. I don't think he's being transparent with the fans. If anything, the public confidence that he's displaying by stating the AAC is stronger with just 11 football members could work against him. A hardship waiver is less likely to be granted if you're doing everything possible to claim that you don't actually have a hardship and are positioning what is supposed to be temporary waiver to actually be a permanent one in reality. IMHO, Aresco would have been better off stating, "UConn screwed us. We're scrambling for next year, so we need help from the NCAA to make us whole on such short notice."

Agree. I think getting a waiver is almost a sure thing for the AAC---just not the waiver Aresco really wants. I guess that confidence he is exuding is just bravado gone haywire.

As to his other talking points strategy---I think you have to consider that Aresco is fighting a PR battle on several fronts at the same time. The P6 narrative means he has to maintain the AAC remains strong without UConn. Running around saying the conference is in shambles without UConn might help with the NCAA, but it would hurt his P6 narrative--at a time when the on the field play is giving the P6 thing some traction in the computer conference rankings.

I’m quoting this quote train for one very important reason: it’s the one that finally discusses what is really going on here.

I can promise you the powers that be in the AAC are not overly concerned with the pet theories and pie-in-the-sky desires of message board warriors.

As it has been since the conference settled on the “P6” campaign as the best way forward, the AAC is concerned with how this looks. They aren’t concerned with geography or identity or this team or that team. When the time comes to add someone, they will simply pick from a shortlist that probably only saw minor changes with UConn leaving.

And that time will come, if for no other reason than because the pressure, both internal and external, to add a replacement will be immense. That replacement will be someone willing to accept the conditions of AAC membership. That tends to rule out programs looking for a stable, long term home or programs looking for something they can get in their current situation.

The discussion here about Air Force being unhappy suggests y’all know this already. But it’s that very situation which reveals the outer limit of the AAC’s reach: the MWC, despite its known issues, is stable because of its geography, and the AAC doesn’t have enough advantages to easily overcome that advantage.

Thus, the AAC has one real path forward, and that is tobuy as much time as possible in order to spin the events as favorably as possible. The add, when it comes, won’t look like a marriage of convenience or a conference rushing to add for the sake of easing pressure.

For this very same reason, Aresco must remain outwardly confident at all times. He can’t come across as panicking or even as laid back. He must appear calm and in control if his conference is going to gain positive PR from this.

Almost any school could possibly be on the AAC presidents’ shortlist. Rutgers to the B1G, Missouri to the SEC, Louisville to the ACC, and TCU to the Big 12 all tell us that nearly any add can be justified...provided the add comes at a time and place chosen by the conference.

Finally, don’t be fooled by the “we don’t want to upset other conferences” talking point. It’s a justification, and no more. The AAC clearly didn’t have the future of the MVC in mind when it poached Witchita State.
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2019 11:59 AM by DustMyBroom.)
10-17-2019 11:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoldenWarrior11 Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,629
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #93
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 11:38 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(10-17-2019 10:38 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  
(10-17-2019 10:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  There’s no question that UConn was injured by the loss of Pitt, Cuse, WVU, ND, Rutgers, and Louisville but that money was meant to stay with the conference. UConn no longer wants to be in that conference.

You have to be joking if you consider association with UConn football a plus for the AAC additions. UConn football is a dumpster fire.

Today it is, absolutely. But in 2010, UConn recently had a Fiesta Bowl appearance, and had four consecutive bowl berths. They had won the Big East twice. Their head coach had just gotten hired at Maryland. At that point, Memphis was a train wreck (3-21 from '10-'11), ECU had consecutive losing seasons, Tulane was terrible, UCF and Houston were inconsistent (1st place finishes, followed by losing seasons).

Make no mistake, it was because of UConn, Cincinnati and USF that the AAC was able to make more money and get more exposure than C-USA had, and it was due to the AQ-status those three had while in the Big East that provided more value than what they had in C-USA. Arguing that UConn owes anything to the AAC beyond their exit fees is foolish and shortsighted.

Bottom line, the AAC benefited from having UConn in the league for seven seasons. UConn was compensated in their loss of conference status with exit fees left behind from departing members. Both sides received value from their temporary arrangement.

That Fiesta Bowl was the product of being the shiniest of 8 turds. Going in as an unranked 8-4 team and getting thumped is hardly an accomplishment.

UConn football has been awful ever since and their basketball has been pathetic since the split when arguably they should have been the standard bearer but instead other programs had to step up and carry their dead weight. Any value from Storrs is purely in name recognition.

The Huskies have been a leech, a pouty whiny leech.

You're entitled to your opinion, but it sounds like you should be frustrated more with how the BCS was set up and arranged than with what UConn did in football in the Big East. The fact remains that they were the AQ for the year they went to the Fiesta Bowl, and that was absolutely an effect for the increased exposure and pay from the C-USA schools that were called up to Big East Football/American.

From 2006-2011, Memphis Football had four ten-loss seasons. During that same stretch, UCF had three losing seasons; Tulane had a losing season every year during that period; SMU lost eleven games twice; ECU was coming off consecutive losing seasons during this period. Again, you can point to UConn being a "awful" all you want, but the fact remains - at the time of the split - it was the brand association and marketability of UConn, Cincinnati and USF that allowed the American to get its television exposure and revenue that was clearly superior to that in C-USA.

And the idea of UConn being called a leech is awfully similar to many tones on here during the BE/AAC split (the C7 was repeatedly referred to as leeches by select fans from the C-USA call-ups). It is humorous to think that promoted schools are automatically entitled to revenues and payouts that established programs had already been making (and earned based on what the market dictated), even after a conference gets gutted and scrapped, while also believing that those same programs that were left behind should be cut loose since they do not provide any value. You can't have it both ways.
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2019 12:30 PM by GoldenWarrior11.)
10-17-2019 12:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #94
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 11:58 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 12:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 09:35 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(10-15-2019 03:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-15-2019 10:30 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  Same the AAC commissioner needs to stop dragging his feet about this. The NCAA should deny this waiver because all they will be doing is green-lighting prolonged instability for 3-4 conferences.

Just add UAB/Boise/Fantasy team. Then let CUSA & UConn work out a deal to replace UAB on the CUSA schedule. Heck, they can even join CUSA as a football only team which would be ideal for them IMO.

Draggin his feet? He's made his request. He nor the conference has any business doing anything else until the NCAA makes a decision.

Yeah, I don't think Aresco is dragging his feet since it's the ball is in the NCAA's court at this point. My main issue with Aresco is his frequent habit of over-promising and under-delivering. His public comments about a waiver make it seem like a simple formality that is essentially guaranteed to get approved, whereas the stark reality is that the ACC was shot down just a couple of years ago for essentially what Aresco is asking for. I don't think he's being transparent with the fans. If anything, the public confidence that he's displaying by stating the AAC is stronger with just 11 football members could work against him. A hardship waiver is less likely to be granted if you're doing everything possible to claim that you don't actually have a hardship and are positioning what is supposed to be temporary waiver to actually be a permanent one in reality. IMHO, Aresco would have been better off stating, "UConn screwed us. We're scrambling for next year, so we need help from the NCAA to make us whole on such short notice."

Agree. I think getting a waiver is almost a sure thing for the AAC---just not the waiver Aresco really wants. I guess that confidence he is exuding is just bravado gone haywire.

As to his other talking points strategy---I think you have to consider that Aresco is fighting a PR battle on several fronts at the same time. The P6 narrative means he has to maintain the AAC remains strong without UConn. Running around saying the conference is in shambles without UConn might help with the NCAA, but it would hurt his P6 narrative--at a time when the on the field play is giving the P6 thing some traction in the computer conference rankings.

I’m quoting this quote train for one very important reason: it’s the one that finally discusses what is really going on here.

I can promise you the powers that be in the AAC are not overly concerned with the pet theories and pie-in-the-sky desires of message board warriors.

As it has been since the conference settled on the “P6” campaign as the best way forward, the AAC is concerned with how this looks. They aren’t concerned with geography or identity or this team or that team. When the time comes to add someone, they will simply pick from a shortlist that probably only saw minor changes with UConn leaving.

And that time will come, if for no other reason than because the pressure, both internal and external, to add a replacement will be immense. That replacement will be someone willing to accept the conditions of AAC membership. That tends to rule out programs looking for a stable, long term home or programs looking for something they can get in their current situation.

The discussion here about Air Force being unhappy suggests y’all know this already. But it’s that very situation which reveals the outer limit of the AAC’s reach: the MWC, despite its known issues, is stable because of its geography, and the AAC doesn’t have enough advantages to easily overcome that advantage.

Thus, the AAC has one real path forward, and that is tobuy as much time as possible in order to spin the events as favorably as possible. The add, when it comes, won’t look like a marriage of convenience or a conference rushing to add for the sake of easing pressure.

For this very same reason, Aresco must remain outwardly confident at all times. He can’t come across as panicking or even as laid back. He must appear calm and in control if his conference is going to gain positive PR from this.

Almost any school could possibly be on the AAC presidents’ shortlist. Rutgers to the B1G, Missouri to the SEC, Louisville to the ACC, and TCU to the Big 12 all tell us that nearly any add can be justified...provided the add comes at a time and place chosen by the conference.

Finally, don’t be fooled by the “we don’t want to upset other conferences” talking point. It’s a justification, and no more. The AAC clearly didn’t have the future of the MVC in mind when it poached Witchita State.

And I think that is the key. When the AAC see's someone who actually adds value to the conference--they will have no problem pulling the trigger. Its also the biggest reason there is no rush to add anyone right now---there simply is no compelling "value adding" choice available at the buffet of current options. 04-cheers
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2019 01:59 PM by Attackcoog.)
10-17-2019 01:58 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DustMyBroom Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 450
Joined: Nov 2018
Reputation: 52
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location:
Post: #95
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 01:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-17-2019 11:58 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 12:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(10-16-2019 09:35 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  
(10-15-2019 03:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Draggin his feet? He's made his request. He nor the conference has any business doing anything else until the NCAA makes a decision.

Yeah, I don't think Aresco is dragging his feet since it's the ball is in the NCAA's court at this point. My main issue with Aresco is his frequent habit of over-promising and under-delivering. His public comments about a waiver make it seem like a simple formality that is essentially guaranteed to get approved, whereas the stark reality is that the ACC was shot down just a couple of years ago for essentially what Aresco is asking for. I don't think he's being transparent with the fans. If anything, the public confidence that he's displaying by stating the AAC is stronger with just 11 football members could work against him. A hardship waiver is less likely to be granted if you're doing everything possible to claim that you don't actually have a hardship and are positioning what is supposed to be temporary waiver to actually be a permanent one in reality. IMHO, Aresco would have been better off stating, "UConn screwed us. We're scrambling for next year, so we need help from the NCAA to make us whole on such short notice."

Agree. I think getting a waiver is almost a sure thing for the AAC---just not the waiver Aresco really wants. I guess that confidence he is exuding is just bravado gone haywire.

As to his other talking points strategy---I think you have to consider that Aresco is fighting a PR battle on several fronts at the same time. The P6 narrative means he has to maintain the AAC remains strong without UConn. Running around saying the conference is in shambles without UConn might help with the NCAA, but it would hurt his P6 narrative--at a time when the on the field play is giving the P6 thing some traction in the computer conference rankings.

I’m quoting this quote train for one very important reason: it’s the one that finally discusses what is really going on here.

I can promise you the powers that be in the AAC are not overly concerned with the pet theories and pie-in-the-sky desires of message board warriors.

As it has been since the conference settled on the “P6” campaign as the best way forward, the AAC is concerned with how this looks. They aren’t concerned with geography or identity or this team or that team. When the time comes to add someone, they will simply pick from a shortlist that probably only saw minor changes with UConn leaving.

And that time will come, if for no other reason than because the pressure, both internal and external, to add a replacement will be immense. That replacement will be someone willing to accept the conditions of AAC membership. That tends to rule out programs looking for a stable, long term home or programs looking for something they can get in their current situation.

The discussion here about Air Force being unhappy suggests y’all know this already. But it’s that very situation which reveals the outer limit of the AAC’s reach: the MWC, despite its known issues, is stable because of its geography, and the AAC doesn’t have enough advantages to easily overcome that advantage.

Thus, the AAC has one real path forward, and that is tobuy as much time as possible in order to spin the events as favorably as possible. The add, when it comes, won’t look like a marriage of convenience or a conference rushing to add for the sake of easing pressure.

For this very same reason, Aresco must remain outwardly confident at all times. He can’t come across as panicking or even as laid back. He must appear calm and in control if his conference is going to gain positive PR from this.

Almost any school could possibly be on the AAC presidents’ shortlist. Rutgers to the B1G, Missouri to the SEC, Louisville to the ACC, and TCU to the Big 12 all tell us that nearly any add can be justified...provided the add comes at a time and place chosen by the conference.

Finally, don’t be fooled by the “we don’t want to upset other conferences” talking point. It’s a justification, and no more. The AAC clearly didn’t have the future of the MVC in mind when it poached Witchita State.

And I think that is the key. When the AAC see's someone who actually adds value to the conference--they will have no problem pulling the trigger. Its also the biggest reason there is no rush to add anyone right now---there simply is no compelling "value adding" choice available at the buffet of current options. 04-cheers

...I’m not sure you even bothered to read what I posted apart from the last paragraph. Your belief about the add shows just how effective positive PR spin can be.

Given that the Witchita State addition:
1. Did nothing at all to reinforce your conference’s football profile despite that being by far the most important sport in terms of income generation.
2. Effectively lowered your conference’s academics and research profile.
3. Expanded the footprint in a relatively non-productive manner, with little hope of further expansion in this direction likely to be fruitful.

What stands out about the add is that Witchita State was winning a lot of basketball games, other programs interested in moving to the AAC without football weren’t, and the conference wanted to strengthen its basketball profile. Even at the expense of the negatives listed above.

What else stands out about the add? The AAC powers that be knew about Witchita State right from the beginning of the conference’s existence. They still waited to add them. Why? Because, while the PR wouldn’t have been negative if they’d been invited earlier, the positive PR gained from the AAC being seen to strengthen basketball was clearly valuable, to the extent that few seem aware of any negatives to the add.

A quick word about “adding value”. This phrase has a different, mostly subjective meaning to most AAC posters than it does to just about everyone else on these forums. In those hands, it’s used as a bullying tool to declare yourselves better than others...despite the obvious fact that at least 65 teams in FBS clearly have it better than you do. I have no doubt in my mind that the learned men who are actually making these decisions for the AAC have a more objective meaning to the phrase in mind.

Speaking objectively, UConn football didn’t offer the AAC much. You could make a decent argument for many programs that they would be an improvement over UConn, clear down to the likes of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Mount Union, and Mary Hardin-Baylor. On the other hand, unless you plan to invite Gonzaga, no one is going to give you anything remotely like the brand value you had in UConn. That reality shapes what the AAC is going to do, truly, but it’s not as if the conference was ever likely to do otherwise in the first place. Basketball is, at best, one third the value of football. For most conferences, it’s substantially less valuable in relative terms than that. Therefore, the AAC really just needs someone with one third or better the football brand value of UConn’s basketball brand value. Long streaks of bowl eligibility, recent ten win seasons, wins over cartel opponents who finished with winning records...those candidates are available. It’s just a matter of the AAC picking one.

That just leaves the final and, from a PR perspective, most important dynamic: time. If you want to maintain that hard won separation that the league so clearly values, then poaching one of their best simply isn’t good enough. Instead, you have to poach after a seemingly long process of deliberation. Make it look like you are adding to better the conference, not like you are adding because you need a member, and that will truly help create the idea that separation (rather than merely continuation) exists in the minds of the masses.

In a very real way, time is, in its way, even more important to this addition than on field performance is, or even who the add is. In the short term it is, that is.
10-18-2019 11:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 50,019
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #96
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-18-2019 11:55 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote:  A quick word about “adding value”. This phrase has a different, mostly subjective meaning to most AAC posters than it does to just about everyone else on these forums. In those hands, it’s used as a bullying tool to declare yourselves better than others...despite the obvious fact that at least 65 teams in FBS clearly have it better than you do. I have no doubt in my mind that the learned men who are actually making these decisions for the AAC have a more objective meaning to the phrase in mind.

I'm often critical of AAC fans around here, but IMO they use the phrase "add value" very accurately: The AAC has a new TV deal that brings in about $7m a school, so any school added must be at least worth that to ESPN, and preferably more. You can't be adding schools that are going to lower your per-school payout, unless there is a very compelling reason.

You mention Wichita State, but when they joined (a) the AAC was still under the old hyper-peanuts deal so the amount needed to add value was lower, and (b) presumably, they aren't sharing in the football revenue, so they only have to be value-worthy in a non-football sense, which I am sure they are.

I don't see that being used in any other way.

You seem to take umbrage at this, as it may exclude USM from AAC membership, something that grates when the AAC includes several schools that you shared a conference with just a few years ago. Believe me, as a USF fan, I know the feeling.

But it doesn't change the reality.

07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 10-18-2019 03:48 PM by quo vadis.)
10-18-2019 03:43 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BearcatJerry Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 12,092
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 506
I Root For: UC Bearcats
Location:
Post: #97
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 10:32 AM)MUsince96 Wrote:  If there is any fire to the Air Force smoke of them being unhappy in the MWC and they were to leave for the AAC. And the MWC backfilled with say, UTEP.

I wonder if UConn could negotiate a football only deal with C-USA? Throwing them 2 hoops games a year or something.

Or maybe they can make Independence work. I don't know. Just thinking of scenarios that could make a UConn domino fall.

BWHAHAHAHA....

Not a chance in hell.
10-18-2019 04:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tigersmoke4 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,507
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 97
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #98
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-18-2019 03:43 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(10-18-2019 11:55 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote:  A quick word about “adding value”. This phrase has a different, mostly subjective meaning to most AAC posters than it does to just about everyone else on these forums. In those hands, it’s used as a bullying tool to declare yourselves better than others...despite the obvious fact that at least 65 teams in FBS clearly have it better than you do. I have no doubt in my mind that the learned men who are actually making these decisions for the AAC have a more objective meaning to the phrase in mind.

I'm often critical of AAC fans around here, but IMO they use the phrase "add value" very accurately: The AAC has a new TV deal that brings in about $7m a school, so any school added must be at least worth that to ESPN, and preferably more. You can't be adding schools that are going to lower your per-school payout, unless there is a very compelling reason.

You mention Wichita State, but when they joined (a) the AAC was still under the old hyper-peanuts deal so the amount needed to add value was lower, and (b) presumably, they aren't sharing in the football revenue, so they only have to be value-worthy in a non-football sense, which I am sure they are.

I don't see that being used in any other way.

You seem to take umbrage at this, as it may exclude USM from AAC membership, something that grates when the AAC includes several schools that you shared a conference with just a few years ago. Believe me, as a USF fan, I know the feeling.

But it doesn't change the reality.

07-coffee3

I've noticed that a lot of people are still saying that the American programs are going to be getting 7mil. The actual amount is closer to 8mil per team. It seems that up to now ESPN hasn't shown any particular interest in decreasing the total payout to the AAC with or without UCONN and that doesn't even include splitting their share of NCAA and CFP monies. The AAC teams are actually coming into a mini windfall once the waiver is granted after UCONN scats.04-cheers04-cheers
10-18-2019 07:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #99
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-18-2019 07:05 PM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  
(10-18-2019 03:43 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(10-18-2019 11:55 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote:  A quick word about “adding value”. This phrase has a different, mostly subjective meaning to most AAC posters than it does to just about everyone else on these forums. In those hands, it’s used as a bullying tool to declare yourselves better than others...despite the obvious fact that at least 65 teams in FBS clearly have it better than you do. I have no doubt in my mind that the learned men who are actually making these decisions for the AAC have a more objective meaning to the phrase in mind.

I'm often critical of AAC fans around here, but IMO they use the phrase "add value" very accurately: The AAC has a new TV deal that brings in about $7m a school, so any school added must be at least worth that to ESPN, and preferably more. You can't be adding schools that are going to lower your per-school payout, unless there is a very compelling reason.

You mention Wichita State, but when they joined (a) the AAC was still under the old hyper-peanuts deal so the amount needed to add value was lower, and (b) presumably, they aren't sharing in the football revenue, so they only have to be value-worthy in a non-football sense, which I am sure they are.

I don't see that being used in any other way.

You seem to take umbrage at this, as it may exclude USM from AAC membership, something that grates when the AAC includes several schools that you shared a conference with just a few years ago. Believe me, as a USF fan, I know the feeling.

But it doesn't change the reality.

07-coffee3

I've noticed that a lot of people are still saying that the American programs are going to be getting 7mil. The actual amount is closer to 8mil per team. It seems that up to now ESPN hasn't shown any particular interest in decreasing the total payout to the AAC with or without UCONN and that doesn't even include splitting their share of NCAA and CFP monies. The AAC teams are actually coming into a mini windfall once the waiver is granted after UCONN scats.04-cheers04-cheers

Whether UConn is replaced or not, the other AAC schools definitely shouldn't count on ESPN being generous enough to pay each of them any more than they already agreed to.
10-18-2019 08:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Online
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,389
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 950
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #100
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-17-2019 10:38 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  
(10-17-2019 10:19 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  There’s no question that UConn was injured by the loss of Pitt, Cuse, WVU, ND, Rutgers, and Louisville but that money was meant to stay with the conference. UConn no longer wants to be in that conference.

You have to be joking if you consider association with UConn football a plus for the AAC additions. UConn football is a dumpster fire.

Today it is, absolutely. But in 2010, UConn recently had a Fiesta Bowl appearance, and had four consecutive bowl berths. They had won the Big East twice. Their head coach had just gotten hired at Maryland. At that point, Memphis was a train wreck (3-21 from '10-'11), ECU had consecutive losing seasons, Tulane was terrible, UCF and Houston were inconsistent (1st place finishes, followed by losing seasons).

Make no mistake, it was because of UConn, Cincinnati and USF that the AAC was able to make more money and get more exposure than C-USA had, and it was due to the AQ-status those three had while in the Big East that provided more value than what they had in C-USA. Arguing that UConn owes anything to the AAC beyond their exit fees is foolish and shortsighted.

Bottom line, the AAC benefited from having UConn in the league for seven seasons. UConn was compensated in their loss of conference status with exit fees left behind from departing members. Both sides received value from their temporary arrangement.

GW11,

I would say it was "partly because" and not, as you say, "because" of UConn, Cincinnati and USF that the AAC was able to make more money and get more exposure than C-USA had. As a long-time Cincy follower, I would hope I can view this rather objectively.

I also fully agree that "arguing that UConn owes anything to the AAC beyond their exit fees is foolish and shortsighted," as you note. Very good point.

I do think you might be selling short (at least somewhat) the other now-AAC programs with some of the points you're making in this thread (admittedly, I'm a Memphis fan, as you know, so my bias might be clouding my judgment).
(This post was last modified: 10-18-2019 09:11 PM by bill dazzle.)
10-18-2019 08:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2024 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, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.