(06-09-2021 06:37 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 06:10 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 05:52 PM)pesik Wrote:  Attackcoog: any commish could have done what aresco did for way less money, including the MWC commish

pesik: i disagree, and give my reasons (never did i mention you saying he was a bad commish-- simply noting you undermined what he's accomplished, not just anyone could have done it)

Attackcoog: why are you gaslighting me, I never said he was bad (something i never claimed you did)

lol...you're doing it again. I never accused you of claiming I said he was a bad commissioner.

is this a troll?? you are gaslighting while claiming to be gaslit...
youve added in most of your responses in some shape or form that you think aresco is a good commish and thats not the issue.. why even add that part then? if we both know thats not a issue why clarify that ..especially when 95% of my posts were talking about you undermining his accomplishments

what am I gaslighting you on then...be specific..

you think a mwc decision that led to multiple disputes within the mwc and a mwc lawsuit, is thompson outfoxing.. in the 2013 leaked emails aresco flat says taking the boise deal will lead to issues down the line for a team that might not even be king in a few years. boise isnt king anymore and mwc has issue from the sweetheart deal but "we were the ones outfoxed"...okay, how does that work

Ok. Lets solve the gaslighting issue right now. Post the link where I accuse you of claiming that I said Aesco was a bad commissioner.

(06-08-2021 01:39 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  Got lucky we are coming out of a pandemic and leadership changes are less probable.

We are in the middle of the expansion as our championship waiver nears expiration.
All of our programs are cash grabbing to financially recover from 2020.

I am not a fan of Aresco but I understand the need for stability right now. His day will come.

When his day comes....we should steal Judy MacLeod from CUSA. I hear nice things from CUSA teams and she should be cheaper.

Attack vs Coach P is great off season fun.

(06-09-2021 07:52 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Attack vs Coach P is great off season fun.

lol...taking out my frustrations now that the Boise thread entertainment has given up the ghost.

(06-09-2021 07:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Ok. Lets solve the gaslighting issue right now. Post the link where I accuse you of claiming that I said Aesco was a bad commissioner.

you countered my argument with the statements below
you made claims about me gaslighting you then added statements like this

(06-09-2021 05:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  ive made it clear that I like Aresco as our conference commissioner and believe he is excellent at promoting the conference.

(06-09-2021 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  My point is not that Aresco is a bad commissioner. He is not.

why even post that, when no one was even accusing you of that

I wrote a mini book, with 95% of it addressing this exact statement below that you wrote.. which since this is copy and paste you 100% wrote it

(06-09-2021 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  he hasnt done anything that would lead me to believe it couldnt have been accomplished by Thompson or Banowski if they had the same line up of schools to sell. In fact---WITH LESS to work with, Thompson outfoxed Aresco for the Boise and by doing so---put the final nail in the AAC western expansion

95% of my post was comparing the drastic differences between thompson and aresco- how its not accurate to think he wouldnt have done the same things.. addressing that we made the right decision with boise, the MWC made the Wrong decision, we werent "outfoxed".. we made the obvious correct long term decision.....and that the AAC is seen as far more than the MWC today but that wasnt the case in 2013, we were seen as equals by most at that time. there is a realistic possibility the MWC could have been seen as far more than the AAC had they and us had different leadership in 2013

all of those address points you made, none of that is gaslighting.. and that was 95% of my post.. you just screamed victim for no reason..

If Aresco would have kept the Big East together and everyone was being well paid then he’d certainly deserve the salary. I don’t think he’s done anything extraordinary—P6 wasn’t exactly original.

The Tulane/ECU adds were a bad move. You can argue that the Catholic 7 were already on their way out but it’s hard to know for sure.

They had the Catholic 7 plus:
UConn
Temple
UCF
USF
Cincinnati
Memphis
SMU
Houston
FB ONLY: Navy, SDSU, Boise St

That’s the 8 full football members required to be FBS. All they needed was 1 football only school at the time. He overplayed himself and soon thereafter, the league was ripped in half.

A football only add plus a basketball school to preserve the 8/8 balance might have kept things stable.

(06-09-2021 08:36 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Tulane/ECU adds were a bad move. You can argue that the Catholic 7 were already on their way out but it’s hard to know for sure.

there an article with interviews from the c7 and fox... the c7 was leaving the "old big east" and there's nothing that could have been done and it had nothing to do with us. FS1 came to the c7 while in the big east and offered them a large amount of money to leave the then big east.. they didnt want the rest of the aac because we were unstable (this is before the p5 had GoRs)..FS1 wanted a known stable product that was exclusive to them on the channel launch .

itll take to long to find, but its interesting in that the article insinuated had fox not stepped in the c7 had no intentions of leaving

edit: i googled the article i cant find it but i found a mcmurphy tweet talking about it

(06-09-2021 08:34 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 07:43 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Ok. Lets solve the gaslighting issue right now. Post the link where I accuse you of claiming that I said Aesco was a bad commissioner.

you countered my argument with these statements

you made claims about me gaslighting you then added statements like this

(06-09-2021 05:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  That said---ive made it clear that I like Aresco as our conference commissioner and believe he is excellent at promoting the conference.

(06-09-2021 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  My point is not that Aresco is a bad commissioner. He is not.

why even post that, when no one was even accusing you of that

when i wrote a mini book, with 95% of it addressing this exact statement.. which since this is copy and paste you 100% wrote it

(06-09-2021 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  he hasnt done anything that would lead me to believe it couldnt have been accomplished by Thompson or Banowski if they had the same line up of schools to sell. In fact---WITH LESS to work with, Thompson outfoxed Aresco for the Boise and by doing so---put the final nail in the AAC western expansion

95% of my post was comparing the drastic differences between thompson and aresco.. addressing that we made the right decision with boise, the MWC made the Wrong decision, we werent "outfoxed".. we made the obvious correct long term decision.....and that the AAC is seen as far more than the MWC today...but that wasnt the case in 2013, we were seen as equals by most, there is a realistic possibility the MWC could have been seen as far more than the AAC had they and us had different leadership in 2013

all of those address points you made, none of that is gaslighting.. and that was 95% of my post.. you just screamed victim for no reason..

So, just as I said, it was a complete gas lighting to say I accused you of saying I said Aresco was a bad commissioner.

As for why I keep saying I dont think Aresco is a bad commissioner---its because I dont think Aresco is a bad commissioner. I think he has been a solid leader and a great spokesman for the conference.

The only place we differ is whether the compensation makes sense for a conference where the schools only make 7 million from media and whether Aresco can perform magic where other commissioners would fail dramatically. You say Im discounting Aresco's saving of the AAC. Ok--he gets credit for that. Does he also get credit for lording over its near collapse? How about Thompson? Why does he get no credit for literally saving his conference from being stripped mined by the AAC? If he doesnt get Boise back, he not only loses Boise and SDSU---but his next two best remaining schools are probably gone reducing the MW to a MAC level product at best. Speaking of fine jobs by commissioners---the lowly Carl Benson actually did a great job of rebuilding the realignment ravaged Sunbelt into a sleek conference that passed up CUSA and the MAC to challenge the MW for #2 in the G5. Carl made some fairly cut throat moves like cutting loose Idaho and New Mexico. It was a cold move---but the Sunbelt is a much stronger conference now. Frankly, Ive never thought much of Benson as a commissioner, but he did do a pretty good job in has last chance at bat.

The point is---Aresco is not the only guy who saved his conference over the last decade. I think you are underestimating the other commissioners. Several of them have have made some very deft moves and make only a fraction of what Aresco makes. The strength of the AAC is not Aresco---but the stable of P5 bubble schools that make up the membership of the conference. Yes, his leadership and PR abilities have helped----but the massive investment by schools like UCF, Cinci, Memphis, Houston (and others) is what make the conference what it is.

(06-09-2021 08:44 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 08:36 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  The Tulane/ECU adds were a bad move. You can argue that the Catholic 7 were already on their way out but it’s hard to know for sure.

there an article with interviews from the c7 and fox... the c7 was leaving the "old big east" and there's nothing that could have been done and it had nothing to do with us. FS1 came to the c7 while in the big east and offered them a large amount of money to leave the then big east.. they didnt want the rest of the aac because we were unstable (this is before the p5 had GoRs)..FS1 wanted a known stable product that was exclusive to them on the channel launch .

itll take to long to find, but its interesting in that the article insinuated had fox not stepped in the c7 had no intentions of leaving

edit: i googled the article i cant find it but i found a mcmurphy tweet talking about it

We all knew the c7 were leaving prior to Tulane.

(06-09-2021 08:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The point is---Aresco is not the only guy who saved his conference over the last decade. I think you are underestimating the other commissioners. Several of them have have made some very deft moves and make only a fraction of what Aresco makes. The strength of the AAC is not Aresco---but the stable of P5 bubble schools that make up the membership of the conference. Yes, his leadership and PR abilities have helped----but the massive investment by schools like UCF, Cinci, Memphis, and Houston (and others) is what make the conference what it is.

jim delany in the big 10, who has done a masterful job, is the only Comish i think has done better than aresco in the time span.. most arent even close

also the strength of the aac is "our culture" as a conference.. when every school in the entire conference is investing, while similar teams in other conferences arent investing a huge part of that is the leadership.. which is what i believe you are underestimating about aresco's impact.. i gave the stipend/tulsa example... tulsa's AD (smaller athletic budget than many mwc/c-usa) was insulted that they were asked if theyd do stipends, and ranted that the AAC is a power conference and will match what the p5 do.. do i believe Tulsa would have that rant if they were in c-usa or the mwc? no i dont ..there is a culture here to invest

the mwc has tons of p5 bubble teams aswell...again i think you are looking at the AAC now, not the aac in its inception.... if aresco in 2013 was the head of the mwc and started some campaign and pushed all the leadership to adopt it about being the best conference in the west or the 2nd west power league, those conference members would adopt that culture.. instead he publicly says its not their goal to compete with the p5 everyone should invest for whats best for them ("we hope to be the best g5") and that mindset trickles down to its members

edit: about the paragraph you wront about the other commish...none of what they did are remotely close ... all those conferences are percieved worse in 2020 than they were in 2013, making tough decisions doesnt equate to conference trajectory
thompson made a tough decision to keep boise and sdsu.. how did he capitalize on that and he momentm gained.. he didnt

All P5 conference commissioners should make less than Aresco. They do not have to fight the fight that Aresco does. All the P5 commissions have to do is ask where does the P5 conference sign the tv contract for multi-million dollars and then go to the country club for a game of golf and a drink. Many, many thanks to the AAC Presidents who wisely hired Aresco and have kept him on board.

(06-09-2021 09:13 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 08:51 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The point is---Aresco is not the only guy who saved his conference over the last decade. I think you are underestimating the other commissioners. Several of them have have made some very deft moves and make only a fraction of what Aresco makes. The strength of the AAC is not Aresco---but the stable of P5 bubble schools that make up the membership of the conference. Yes, his leadership and PR abilities have helped----but the massive investment by schools like UCF, Cinci, Memphis, and Houston (and others) is what make the conference what it is.

jim delany in the big 10, who has done a masterful job, is the only Comish i think has done better than aresco in the time span.. most arent even close

also the strength of the aac is "our culture" as a conference.. when every school in the entire conference is investing, while similar teams in other conferences arent investing a huge part of that is the leadership.. which is what i believe you are underestimating about aresco's impact.. i gave the stipend/tulsa example... tulsa's AD (smaller athletic budget than many mwc/c-usa) was insulted that they were asked if theyd do stipends, and ranted that the AAC is a power conference and will match what the p5 do.. do i believe Tulsa would have that rant if they were in c-usa or the mwc? no i dont ..there is a culture here to invest

the mwc has tons of p5 bubble teams aswell...again i think you are looking at the AAC now, not the aac in its inception.... if aresco in 2013 was the head of the mwc and started some campaign and pushed all the leadership to adopt it about being the best conference in the west or the 2nd west power league, those conference members would adopt that culture.. instead he publicly says its not their goal to compete with the p5 everyone should invest for whats best for them ("we hope to be the best g5") and that mindset trickles down to its members

edit: about the paragraph you wront about the other commish...none of what they did are remotely close ... all those conferences are percieved worse in 2020 than they were in 2013, making tough decisions doesnt equate to conference trajectory
thompson made a tough decision to keep boise and sdsu.. how did he capitalize on that and he momentm gained.. he didnt

The Sunbelt is perceived worse today than in 2013?

What's funny is that even when the G4 wannabes come over here and say they hate P6, it's ridiculous, how could you even think that...they very often say "I wish our commissioner was as proactive as Aresco."
Do people want Hair Thompson? Or Judy?

Then there's the "I could have negotiated that media rights deal, we got only what we should have given ratings." Yeah okay and you could kick better than Sarah Fuller.

A lot of complaints are just "He makes too much."

Here are the market comps from 2018-19, according to tax documents obtained by USA Today:

1. Jim Delany, Big Ten: $10.3 million
2. Larry Scott, Pac-12: $5.4 million
3. Bob Bowlsby, Big 12: $4 million
4. John Swofford, ACC: $3.8 million
5. Greg Sankey, SEC: $2.6 million

Aresco has more of an uphill climb than any of those.

(06-09-2021 10:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Sunbelt is perceived worse today than in 2013?

lol i clealry meant within each commishs tenure (benson was 2012-13 season to the 2108-19 season), benson hasnt been sunbelt commish for 3 cycles now (from 2013 to now none of the g5 commish within their tenure drastically improved their league- i used now for the commishs still in office).. and yes within his tenure the sunbelt got worse. it lost almost every single member in his tenure to a league of comparable status, did nothing creative to stand out, just copied the MAC...

the current sunbelt deal that was signed under his tenure has them the worst payed fbs league in the nation, despite not even being the worst performing league ... what did benson do to establish the league...again he didnt even brand them like macnation

ironically the best years of the sunbelt happened after he stopped being their commish

Extend him. He is doing a good job. No need to replace him while looking for UConn's replacement, working on waivers, and trying to land a spot in a potential play off expansion.

(06-09-2021 05:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 04:13 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Aresco was hired in the summer. All those articles are from the fall when the wholsale defections began....despite Aresco's leadership by the way. Again--my point is Aresco has not accomplished anything beyond what one would expect--nor has he accomplished less than one would expect. His first TV deal he got more than CUSA with a line up that was better than CUSA. Whats the basis for greatness there? Aresco lost a dozen schools in 3 months. Where's the greatness? He didnt stop a single defection. His rushed decision to add Tulane and ECU likely wrecked the western wing we were building. That was a clear misstep at the time.

My point is not that Aresco is a bad commissioner. He is not. In fact, I think he's quite good. That said--he hasnt done anything that would lead me to believe it couldnt have been accomplished by Thompson or Banowski if they had the same line up of schools to sell. In fact---WITH LESS to work with, Thompson outfoxed Aresco for the Boise and by doing so---put the final nail in the AAC western expansion and got back SDSU as an additional dividend. There is ample evidence to indicate we dont need to spend that much on a commissioner because the structural hurdles we face cant be overcome with a personable commissioner. Does anyone really believe Aresco is going to get the AAC an an unshared autobid to the expanded playoff? I wouldnt bet the rent money on that. That said---if he does get us an autobid--THEN I'd have to say it was MORE THAN worth it--but to date---I cant say paying 2 million a year for a commissioner has made any significant difference in our outcomes when it comes to the big ticket items. I would add---Aresco has learned a lot over the years. The way he added Wichita and has approached the UConn loss shows me is much more savvy than he was when he took over the conference in 2012. To be clear, Im not suggesting a pay cut or firing him. Im suggesting extending his current deal at the current rate. When he steps away---I suggest paying less than 2 million for the next guy. Its not really a very controversial position.

1 1000000% disagree

im not sure i agree w ith a single point even a little..

when i was reading your 1st paragraph my counter points was what you listed as a secondary paragraph, those back aresco not the other way around...

1) western expansion isnt dead, if aresco decided tomorrow we want western team, we can grab them (if we wanted all sprts)... its our choice not wanting boise, sdsu for logistic reasons

2) adding back Boise on a sweetheart deal was a horrible move by the MWC..as it has publicly factions the mwc, there are lawsuit active right now between boise and the mwc about how long the sweetheart deal can last.. atleast 4 MWC have spoken out against the boise deal publicly...the aac was offered that same sweetheart deal and we refused... there is no aac divide we are united and stronger for it.... if you think "thompson outfoxed" the aac you have no clue ..that was a major aac win not the mwc

3) aresco had nothing to do with the school leaving, its ridiculous to even state, not even Jesus as a commish would stopping members from turning down p5 invites... it is confirmed that fox offered the c7 the mega deal to LEAVE the big east, that fox didnt want instability of the aac (at that time)... nothing was stopping that...
---- the leaving teams did have the power to dissolve the league without having to worry about buyout.. aresco navigated in a way we won

4) ecu and tulane didnt ruin any western wing.... we offered unlv and fresno members while we had ecu and tulane ... boise sabotaged the western wing... saying it had anything to do with tulane and ecu is absurd and lacks reason.... ECU was also doing 9wins a season on 50k attendance during expansion, they were a good add at the time.. western wing just for western wing wasnt the point, it was about getting the best teams

5) you say he hasnt done anything but he established the power 6 campaign, the single greatest thing to happen to this conference.. it made people stop comparing us to the other group of 5.. no one publicly associates us with them anymore, which is the best thing for this league... id rather be the conference just falling short of being top tier, than the biggest kid in the kiddie pool

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

let me stop addressing the false takes in your response and address what i think is the most ridiculous part of your take... that if aresco and thompson switched places the results would have been the same...I have publicly said FOR YEARS that if we switched commissioners the mwc would likely be seen as the better league

in 2013 our leagues were seen as EQUALS- part of your point was that aresco had better schools, IT WASNT SEEN THAT WAY IN 2013!!!!. mwc has multiple state flagships .. according to the bcs computers the MWC was actually better the 1st few years

I'm a strong believer in CULTURE.. the leader sets the tone of what your league will be... (this is seen everywhere in life)
---in 2013 Thompson publicly acknowledged that the mwc goal isnt to compete with the p5, but ot be the bestg5 (still does to this day), says schools dont have to invest more than they had to. when stipends came to be he said every school has their own mission no one is required to do anything, when covid came was extremely quick to shut dwon everything (only to regret it later).. Thompson also prides himself that is isn't like that "other" league that goes to the media about everything.. their league motto is "be the peak" (a pun on their name, that no one knows about)

---aresco from the start even in our darkest preached that we will rise to the position of a power conference, even when we arguable weren't the best g5, he never waivered in saying we were a power conference to every media outlet who would take him.. he made it our identity.. every singe aac president and AD has rants where they spout aresco power talking points..tulsa (who has the smallest athletic budget) was insulted when asked if tulsa would do stipends, and ranted that we are a power league and thats what power leagues do (CULTURE!!!) "buy in" we've all bought into arescos vision and invested accordingly to compete with that vision

the idea that we'd have the same culture with thompson is ridiculous. he literally added san jose state, a low budget school and put no expectation on them to invest (sjsu wants to cut its budget even more)


---- ive had this conversation before, if aresco was the commissioner of the mwc, he would have gone on a media tour about the flagships of the MWC.. he would have 100% made some media campaign to exploit the pac 12 being so bad in all sports for the last 5 years to insinuate the MWC is the best conference in the WEST.. he wouldnt have taken sjsu or utah state without some commitment from them to invest.. the mwc has done nothing to address it flaws, done nothing to change its perceptions, openly accepts it place as a second class citizen.. their league was seen as the same as ours in 2013

its ridiculous, and i mean ridiculous to even imagine we'd have the same results with Thompson

The thing is---WE ALREADY HAD Boise as a "football only" and lost them when Aresco was outfoxed by Thompson.

If you think the MWC (Thompson) overpaying Boise St to keep them (something that continues to cause the MWC major problems 8 years later) is an example of "outfoxing" Aresco, there is no hope for you.

Yea...maybe Aresco is paid a little more than the ideal amount for the top G5 conference. But, is it really that big of a deal?

Even if someone were to assume that a relatively low $1 million were a more appropriate salary, that amounts to less than $130K per school yearly. Give him a short 2 year extension with either no increase or a minimal "inflation bump" under the reasoning that schools budgets are suffering due to COVID.

Then readdress in 2-3 years as schools financial situations improve and see what Aresco is able to accomplish in that timeframe.

(06-10-2021 03:51 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 05:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 04:13 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(06-09-2021 02:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Aresco was hired in the summer. All those articles are from the fall when the wholsale defections began....despite Aresco's leadership by the way. Again--my point is Aresco has not accomplished anything beyond what one would expect--nor has he accomplished less than one would expect. His first TV deal he got more than CUSA with a line up that was better than CUSA. Whats the basis for greatness there? Aresco lost a dozen schools in 3 months. Where's the greatness? He didnt stop a single defection. His rushed decision to add Tulane and ECU likely wrecked the western wing we were building. That was a clear misstep at the time.

My point is not that Aresco is a bad commissioner. He is not. In fact, I think he's quite good. That said--he hasnt done anything that would lead me to believe it couldnt have been accomplished by Thompson or Banowski if they had the same line up of schools to sell. In fact---WITH LESS to work with, Thompson outfoxed Aresco for the Boise and by doing so---put the final nail in the AAC western expansion and got back SDSU as an additional dividend. There is ample evidence to indicate we dont need to spend that much on a commissioner because the structural hurdles we face cant be overcome with a personable commissioner. Does anyone really believe Aresco is going to get the AAC an an unshared autobid to the expanded playoff? I wouldnt bet the rent money on that. That said---if he does get us an autobid--THEN I'd have to say it was MORE THAN worth it--but to date---I cant say paying 2 million a year for a commissioner has made any significant difference in our outcomes when it comes to the big ticket items. I would add---Aresco has learned a lot over the years. The way he added Wichita and has approached the UConn loss shows me is much more savvy than he was when he took over the conference in 2012. To be clear, Im not suggesting a pay cut or firing him. Im suggesting extending his current deal at the current rate. When he steps away---I suggest paying less than 2 million for the next guy. Its not really a very controversial position.

1 1000000% disagree

im not sure i agree w ith a single point even a little..

when i was reading your 1st paragraph my counter points was what you listed as a secondary paragraph, those back aresco not the other way around...

1) western expansion isnt dead, if aresco decided tomorrow we want western team, we can grab them (if we wanted all sprts)... its our choice not wanting boise, sdsu for logistic reasons

2) adding back Boise on a sweetheart deal was a horrible move by the MWC..as it has publicly factions the mwc, there are lawsuit active right now between boise and the mwc about how long the sweetheart deal can last.. atleast 4 MWC have spoken out against the boise deal publicly...the aac was offered that same sweetheart deal and we refused... there is no aac divide we are united and stronger for it.... if you think "thompson outfoxed" the aac you have no clue ..that was a major aac win not the mwc

3) aresco had nothing to do with the school leaving, its ridiculous to even state, not even Jesus as a commish would stopping members from turning down p5 invites... it is confirmed that fox offered the c7 the mega deal to LEAVE the big east, that fox didnt want instability of the aac (at that time)... nothing was stopping that...
---- the leaving teams did have the power to dissolve the league without having to worry about buyout.. aresco navigated in a way we won

4) ecu and tulane didnt ruin any western wing.... we offered unlv and fresno members while we had ecu and tulane ... boise sabotaged the western wing... saying it had anything to do with tulane and ecu is absurd and lacks reason.... ECU was also doing 9wins a season on 50k attendance during expansion, they were a good add at the time.. western wing just for western wing wasnt the point, it was about getting the best teams

5) you say he hasnt done anything but he established the power 6 campaign, the single greatest thing to happen to this conference.. it made people stop comparing us to the other group of 5.. no one publicly associates us with them anymore, which is the best thing for this league... id rather be the conference just falling short of being top tier, than the biggest kid in the kiddie pool

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

let me stop addressing the false takes in your response and address what i think is the most ridiculous part of your take... that if aresco and thompson switched places the results would have been the same...I have publicly said FOR YEARS that if we switched commissioners the mwc would likely be seen as the better league

in 2013 our leagues were seen as EQUALS- part of your point was that aresco had better schools, IT WASNT SEEN THAT WAY IN 2013!!!!. mwc has multiple state flagships .. according to the bcs computers the MWC was actually better the 1st few years

I'm a strong believer in CULTURE.. the leader sets the tone of what your league will be... (this is seen everywhere in life)
---in 2013 Thompson publicly acknowledged that the mwc goal isnt to compete with the p5, but ot be the bestg5 (still does to this day), says schools dont have to invest more than they had to. when stipends came to be he said every school has their own mission no one is required to do anything, when covid came was extremely quick to shut dwon everything (only to regret it later).. Thompson also prides himself that is isn't like that "other" league that goes to the media about everything.. their league motto is "be the peak" (a pun on their name, that no one knows about)

---aresco from the start even in our darkest preached that we will rise to the position of a power conference, even when we arguable weren't the best g5, he never waivered in saying we were a power conference to every media outlet who would take him.. he made it our identity.. every singe aac president and AD has rants where they spout aresco power talking points..tulsa (who has the smallest athletic budget) was insulted when asked if tulsa would do stipends, and ranted that we are a power league and thats what power leagues do (CULTURE!!!) "buy in" we've all bought into arescos vision and invested accordingly to compete with that vision

the idea that we'd have the same culture with thompson is ridiculous. he literally added san jose state, a low budget school and put no expectation on them to invest (sjsu wants to cut its budget even more)


---- ive had this conversation before, if aresco was the commissioner of the mwc, he would have gone on a media tour about the flagships of the MWC.. he would have 100% made some media campaign to exploit the pac 12 being so bad in all sports for the last 5 years to insinuate the MWC is the best conference in the WEST.. he wouldnt have taken sjsu or utah state without some commitment from them to invest.. the mwc has done nothing to address it flaws, done nothing to change its perceptions, openly accepts it place as a second class citizen.. their league was seen as the same as ours in 2013

its ridiculous, and i mean ridiculous to even imagine we'd have the same results with Thompson

The thing is---WE ALREADY HAD Boise as a "football only" and lost them when Aresco was outfoxed by Thompson.

If you think the MWC (Thompson) overpaying Boise St to keep them (something that continues to cause the MWC major problems 8 years later) is an example of "outfoxing" Aresco, there is no hope for you.

A little historical prospective helps. In 2012 we ALREADY had Boise and SDSU. We had spent a lot of time trying to lure BYU and AF--but it was becoming clear that wouldnt happen. Thus, finishing the rest of the AAC western wing---probably 2 to 3 teams---would mean the top 2 or 3 remaining programs in MW would be getting poached. There literally would not be a MW conference after that. The MW would have to take virtually the rest of the WAC just to survive.

So--paying Boise a little more didnt take much of a sales job for the rest of the MW schools. Especially when Thompson had just reacquired the MW second tier rights as a result of negotiations with Comcast over the shuttering of "The Mountain" (the MW conference network). The reality was every team was getting a raise due to spinning off these 2nd tier rights, and by selling Boise rights (which they didnt have until Thompson's plan) as a separate package, the MW teams made more by luring Boise back (despite the bonus) than they did without Boise.

So yes--in a vacuum, uneven revenue sharing would normally be an awful idea. But, if the alternative is being reduced to MAC/Sunbelt level conference--and EVERYONE gets a financial boost out of deal---it suddenly becomes a heck of an idea. In a crisis--you do what have to do. It was a pretty sharp move given the dire situation at hand and the schools Thompson had to work with. A quick prediction---Dont be surprised if uneven revenue sharing returns to the Big12 in the mid-2020's.

(06-10-2021 04:10 PM)Square Knight Wrote:  Yea...maybe Aresco is paid a little more than the ideal amount for the top G5 conference. But, is it really that big of a deal?

Even if someone were to assume that a relatively low $1 million were a more appropriate salary, that amounts to less than $130K per school yearly. Give him a short 2 year extension with either no increase or a minimal "inflation bump" under the reasoning that schools budgets are suffering due to COVID.

Then readdress in 2-3 years as schools financial situations improve and see what Aresco is able to accomplish in that timeframe.

If the CFP expansion recommendation goes through, he's earned a raise.

Agree, if everything goes through, give this man a big fat raise. He has been beating the drum for the AAC non stop for years now.