Attackcoog
Moderator
Posts: 44,883
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2886
I Root For: Houston
Location:
|
RE: Will AAC let UCONN play in 2020 if waiver denied?
(10-20-2019 08:43 PM)DustMyBroom Wrote: (10-18-2019 09:02 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: (10-18-2019 11:55 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote: (10-17-2019 01:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: (10-17-2019 11:58 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote: 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.
...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.
I read it all---I just dont really agree and thought the last line you yourself typed was the real key. When a conference sees an asset which it believes will significantly improve the conference value/profile/performance/tv audience/media value---there is surprisingly little time wasted in between the recognition that an asset adds to the conference (assuming that asset wishes to join) and the addition of the school to the conference.
When it comes to Wichita---its important to remember---the AAC wasnt really looking to add anyone at the time. Wichita began shopping itself to alternative conferences. They even looked at adding football, thinking it might be needed to move to the MW or AAC. At that time, the key UConn/Temple/Memphis legs of AAC basketball were under performing. Additionally, conference SOS was becoming more and more important to collecting at large slots. Thus, the opportunity to add another high quality basketball school sort of fell into AAC's lap at a time when they realized that could really help the conference. Once they realized a basketball only school wouldn't really cost the other schools any money (Wichita isnt getting any media revenue until the new TV deal kicks in) and that the Shockers were primed to have a nice run the very next year---the deal was done---and done quickly.
I know you seem to have an issue with the word "value". Well, it is what it is. FWIW---nobody on this board is making the decision on who to add nor is anyone on this board assigning any "value" to any school that makes any difference in the real world.
But make no mistake, like it or not, there are a group of presidents--along with network honchos---who absolutely are looking at available schools and labeling them as "more" or "less" valuable. As I said before, if there were a choice that all the presidents and the network honchos all clearly saw as fantastically wonderful valuable super duper excellent addition---there would be no hemming and hawing about staying at 11. For instance, if BYU was interested---this would have been a done deal in 10 minutes. Thats yet another reason I dont really buy your "its all PR" theory.
Here is something you may be interested in----a week ago I would have said the chances of adding anyone by 2020 was close to zero. However, if these recent comments by Aresco accurately reflect the leagues positions---it leads me to believe that an addition is now not only possible by 2020---but probable. Apparently, the AAC does not want to play with uneven divisions. This is the first time Ive heard that. I think its possible they really didnt have anyone they wanted to add---but that may have changed recently (making me think those out of nowhere Air Force comments may be the smoke). If it is Air Force, I dont think it was PR that caused the delay. I think the AAC had to talk them into it---and I suspect the final domino may be that it become clear that the new MW deal isnt going to be what they were hoping for.
What happens if the NCAA denies the waiver?
“At that point, if you want to continue the championship game you have to add a team and go back to 12,” Aresco said. “What we said to the NCAA is that we would rather be in a position where we don’t have to raid a conference.”
The other opportunity would be to look at independents.
Here are the independents, other than Notre Dame, which has a partial deal with the Atlantic Coast Conference: Liberty, Army, Brigham Young, Massachusetts and New Mexico State.
Technically, the AAC could go to two divisions of six and five teams, but Aresco said the conference doesn’t want to do that, saying there are too many complications, and he didn’t feel there would be room for four non-conference games.
https://www.inquirer.com/college-sports/...91013.html
BYU would be a clear win for the AAC. There would be no need for the league to spin it any other way. That doesn’t mean teams that aren’t giving up multiple home games against the cartel and regular games against longtime rivals aren’t worth inviting. It does mean the conference has to do more work justifying the choice. I’m not going to list the teams again, but I’ve already pointed out that just about anybody is justifiable, given how well the conference can spin the add as meeting perceived needs.
I was talking about the AAC’s timeline prior to adding Wichita State. You responded with Wichita State’s timeline before they joined the AAC. It doesn’t really explain away why the AAC waited for years to add Wichita State, but to each their own I guess.
The AAC presidents have their list. They’ve been checking it twice, thrice, and then checking it again. I’d be surprised if it was much longer than about four teams at this point. They still aren’t using it to tell a bunch of schools they aren’t worthy. That’s message board posters subjectively twisting an otherwise objective statement about justifying the financial worth of investing in a new school into something they can use against other posters. It goes hand in hand with my previous statements about the conference not investing in message board theories, but instead building an objective approach to replacing (or not replacing) UConn.
I don’t think Air Force is as much interested in the AAC as they are in getting eleven other universities to listen more to their gripes than they had been doing. There isn’t a league like the Patriot available, and I have problems believing most of the conferences out west are going to welcome Olympic sports teams that are going to finish last more than a few times. The financials aren’t necessarily entirely in the AAC’s favor here either, especially when you compute the cost of losing nearby rivals on the yearly schedule, plus entrance and exit fees.
In practice, that all adds up to an addition, likely all sports and nearer to the footprint, that needs some justification before beginning conference play...
A close reading of this pretty much reveals that I do indeed believe in relative value, but value applied objectively, which I believe is how the university presidents would do it. And, objectively speaking, the AAC is slowly being pushed toward making an add that doesn’t make everyone happy. The more time the conference has to spin things, the better that add will look in the long term...whether it wins anything in the conference or not.
Honestly---I think your kinda splitting hairs. I dont think the AAC's long time line has a thing to do with PR. As for Wichita, the conference didnt add them at inception because it didnt think it needed them. It thought the UConn/Memphis/Temple/Cini core would be enough. Later when that core underperformed, and Wichita began shopping themselves, the conditions to add them became ripe. That said, I think we agree on most of what going on.
As you said, if there was a clear value added pick to get back to 12, they would have already been added and there would be no reason for PR. So, that, by your own admission means the AAC presidents have looked at the remaining list of teams who have interest in joining and dont see any that are not clearly dilutive to the conference (by their objective measures).
So, with the waiver, the conference has bought themselves 2 years to get a NCAA rule change that will allow FBS conferences (with 11+ members) to have a divisionless CCG with an 8 game conference schedule. In other words, the 2 years is to AVOID adding a team they dont want.
If that doesnt work---the AAC will reassess the available universe of teams that would say yes to an AAC invite. Hopefully, by then there will be at least one school that is a additive to the AAC as a full member. If not, the conference presidents will objectively pick the least dilutive school from the available options. If the options are similar to now---I hope they use the split option to maximize the positive impact of that 12th spot. Pick a good football program as a "football only" school and add VCU as a 'non-football" member. That would go a long way toward creating a pretty decent 12th member that no single school from the available options could come close to matching.
As for PR if they are forced to take a team they dont want---it will be limited to a press conference announcing the new member as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Its the conference version of national signing day. lol...I have yet to ever hear a coach talk about how bad his newly signed recruiting class sucks. Same goes for a conference announcing its newest school.
(This post was last modified: 10-20-2019 11:53 PM by Attackcoog.)
|
|