(04-03-2024 08:35 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 07:40 AM)b2b Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 06:53 AM)ghostofclt! Wrote:  clt says always go to another floor's bathroom when you have serious work to do, cannot run into a co worker after stinking up the place

Disagree. That's a beta move.

Be proud of your work. Blow it up and walk out with pride!

clt understands the confusion now. ecu grads normally use porta john's or outhouses.

Good luck to him.

I think it’s a good hire, the problem is the situation he enters.

1. A long term deal with ESPN that unfortunately keeps the league far behind the P leagues.

2. No way to really prevent any of the more attractive schools from leaving if the invite came.

3. So really his job will be to keep AAC slightly ahead of the other G schools and hope to be able to poach from other G leagues if the AAC gets poached.

I like this move. He shows a lot of promise. Strategically there are some very good moves for this league increasing viability, profile, and income to it's members. I hope he's got a vision.

This is a great opportunity for us all!!

I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

(04-03-2024 04:07 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

fix conf BB tourn
get people in seats

(04-04-2024 02:19 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  fix conf BB tourn
get people in seats

New Orleans is the answer

(04-03-2024 11:36 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:07 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

agreed!

(04-03-2024 11:36 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:07 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

We don't have the luxury of following everyone else's model. We need basketball credits and income. Unless Tulsa, Temple, Memphis, Charlotte, and Wichita State return to their former selves, and soon, expanding in basketball is essential.

Hiring this man means efforts to lure Purdue to the AAC will fail.

(04-04-2024 11:32 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 11:36 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:07 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

We don't have the luxury of following everyone else's model. We need basketball credits and income. Unless Tulsa, Temple, Memphis, Charlotte, and Wichita State return to their former selves, and soon, expanding in basketball is essential.

Dumb question, but are the tournament credits enough to make basketball a going concern?

I guess I'm asking, hypothetical best case scenario. We add two basketball teams that net us one more tournament team a year. Is that enough income to justify the adds? What's the ROI there?

(04-04-2024 11:54 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 11:32 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 11:36 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:07 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

We don't have the luxury of following everyone else's model. We need basketball credits and income. Unless Tulsa, Temple, Memphis, Charlotte, and Wichita State return to their former selves, and soon, expanding in basketball is essential.

Dumb question, but are the tournament credits enough to make basketball a going concern?

I guess I'm asking, hypothetical best case scenario. We add two basketball teams that net us one more tournament team a year. Is that enough income to justify the adds? What's the ROI there?

The benefits come as we get 3-4 schools a year in the tournament, not just 1 or 2. It also raises our chances of having one of them advance deep into the tournament, which increases income and exposure.

(04-03-2024 02:12 PM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  I think it’s a good hire, the problem is the situation he enters.

1. A long term deal with ESPN that unfortunately keeps the league far behind the P leagues.

2. No way to really prevent any of the more attractive schools from leaving if the invite came.

3. So really his job will be to keep AAC slightly ahead of the other G schools and hope to be able to poach from other G leagues if the AAC gets poached.

Then the tricky part is if you do things that address problems 1 and 3 well, it means some of your schools are in such good shape that it only further puts you at risk for problem 2.

(04-04-2024 11:54 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 11:32 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 11:36 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:07 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

We don't have the luxury of following everyone else's model. We need basketball credits and income. Unless Tulsa, Temple, Memphis, Charlotte, and Wichita State return to their former selves, and soon, expanding in basketball is essential.

Dumb question, but are the tournament credits enough to make basketball a going concern?

I guess I'm asking, hypothetical best case scenario. We add two basketball teams that net us one more tournament team a year. Is that enough income to justify the adds? What's the ROI there?

Each game played is roughly 500k a year for 6 years

Lets compare 2 scenarios

2 bid league with no teams winning a game.

Year 1: 2 credits = 1 million
Year 2: 4 credits = 2 million
Year 3: 6 credits = 3 million
Year 4: 8 credits = 4 million
Year 5: 10 credits = 5 million
Year 6: 12 credits = 6 million
Year 7: 12 credits = 6 million
etc

Scenario 2: 4 bids with 2 teams winning only 1 game each

Year 1: 6 credits = 3 million
Year 2: 12 credits = 6 million
Year 3: 18 credits = 9 million
Year 4: 24 credits = 12 million
Year 5: 30 credits = 15 million
Year 6: 36 credits = 18 million
Year 7: 36 credits = 18 million

just that small change in yearly basketball success ends up with a yearly increase of a million dollars a school basically by the time you get credits fully ramped up (this is the difference we are seeing from us to the MWC right now)

Its also a compounding thing. More good team in confernce = more good wins for other teams = more bids come selection sunday

Right now probably best move he could do is strengthen basketball by adding VCU or Dayton to pair up with Army

(04-03-2024 02:12 PM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  I think it’s a good hire, the problem is the situation he enters.

1. A long term deal with ESPN that unfortunately keeps the league far behind the P leagues.

2. No way to really prevent any of the more attractive schools from leaving if the invite came.

3. So really his job will be to keep AAC slightly ahead of the other G schools and hope to be able to poach from other G leagues if the AAC gets poached.

I know you mean well, but why would you set the bar to just treading water? Everything is ok as long as you just marginally stay ahead of the G5?

Set the bar higher. Much higher. We're city universities with access to a lot of money. Take advantage of your advantages.

(04-02-2024 10:55 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(04-02-2024 09:33 PM)ATXUTSAGRAD Wrote:  

(04-02-2024 08:26 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(04-02-2024 07:45 PM)ATXUTSAGRAD Wrote:  This league needs to be SOLD


To the TV viewers and networks

To the CFP and other sports Analysts

To future programs


How is he going to do that?

He worked at ABC for 9 years overseeing their day-to-day college football business. From 2003-2009 he worked at CBS where he was awarded/named:

Quote:He was named a recipient of the Sports Business Journal's "40 Under 40" Award recognizing the most powerful and influential people in the sports business under the age of 40 in 2008 and a recipient of the MultiChannel News 40 under 40 recognizing the most influential people in cable Television also in 2008.

then the Rutgers AD and then the president of IMG Academy.

sounds like a great hire.

Resumes are great

What would you folks think he does first in the AAC office?

Find the rest rooms?

(04-04-2024 08:19 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 02:12 PM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  I think it’s a good hire, the problem is the situation he enters.

1. A long term deal with ESPN that unfortunately keeps the league far behind the P leagues.

2. No way to really prevent any of the more attractive schools from leaving if the invite came.

3. So really his job will be to keep AAC slightly ahead of the other G schools and hope to be able to poach from other G leagues if the AAC gets poached.

I know you mean well, but why would you set the bar to just treading water? Everything is ok as long as you just marginally stay ahead of the G5?

Set the bar higher. Much higher. We're city universities with access to a lot of money. Take advantage of your advantages.

Except for Memphis, we’ve establish Memphis has no money and needs money

(04-04-2024 02:54 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 11:54 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 11:32 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 11:36 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 04:07 PM)Ourland Wrote:  I like the hire. I hope he adds three basketball schools.

And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

We don't have the luxury of following everyone else's model. We need basketball credits and income. Unless Tulsa, Temple, Memphis, Charlotte, and Wichita State return to their former selves, and soon, expanding in basketball is essential.

Dumb question, but are the tournament credits enough to make basketball a going concern?

I guess I'm asking, hypothetical best case scenario. We add two basketball teams that net us one more tournament team a year. Is that enough income to justify the adds? What's the ROI there?

Each game played is roughly 500k a year for 6 years

Lets compare 2 scenarios

2 bid league with no teams winning a game.

Year 1: 2 credits = 1 million
Year 2: 4 credits = 2 million
Year 3: 6 credits = 3 million
Year 4: 8 credits = 4 million
Year 5: 10 credits = 5 million
Year 6: 12 credits = 6 million
Year 7: 12 credits = 6 million
etc

Scenario 2: 4 bids with 2 teams winning only 1 game each

Year 1: 6 credits = 3 million
Year 2: 12 credits = 6 million
Year 3: 18 credits = 9 million
Year 4: 24 credits = 12 million
Year 5: 30 credits = 15 million
Year 6: 36 credits = 18 million
Year 7: 36 credits = 18 million

just that small change in yearly basketball success ends up with a yearly increase of a million dollars a school basically by the time you get credits fully ramped up (this is the difference we are seeing from us to the MWC right now)

Its also a compounding thing. More good team in confernce = more good wins for other teams = more bids come selection sunday

Thanks for the breakdown

(04-04-2024 08:53 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 02:54 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 11:54 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(04-04-2024 11:32 AM)Ourland Wrote:  

(04-03-2024 11:36 PM)TripleA Wrote:  And get us back to a hybrid situation like we had before the C7 split? Nah.

We don't have the luxury of following everyone else's model. We need basketball credits and income. Unless Tulsa, Temple, Memphis, Charlotte, and Wichita State return to their former selves, and soon, expanding in basketball is essential.

Dumb question, but are the tournament credits enough to make basketball a going concern?

I guess I'm asking, hypothetical best case scenario. We add two basketball teams that net us one more tournament team a year. Is that enough income to justify the adds? What's the ROI there?

Each game played is roughly 500k a year for 6 years

Lets compare 2 scenarios

2 bid league with no teams winning a game.

Year 1: 2 credits = 1 million
Year 2: 4 credits = 2 million
Year 3: 6 credits = 3 million
Year 4: 8 credits = 4 million
Year 5: 10 credits = 5 million
Year 6: 12 credits = 6 million
Year 7: 12 credits = 6 million
etc

Scenario 2: 4 bids with 2 teams winning only 1 game each

Year 1: 6 credits = 3 million
Year 2: 12 credits = 6 million
Year 3: 18 credits = 9 million
Year 4: 24 credits = 12 million
Year 5: 30 credits = 15 million
Year 6: 36 credits = 18 million
Year 7: 36 credits = 18 million

just that small change in yearly basketball success ends up with a yearly increase of a million dollars a school basically by the time you get credits fully ramped up (this is the difference we are seeing from us to the MWC right now)

Its also a compounding thing. More good team in confernce = more good wins for other teams = more bids come selection sunday

Thanks for the breakdown

If we took 3 teams we would break even in year 3 or so and then be ahead years four/five using the difference in credits and the left over SMU payment. Taking 3 also increases the chances of those numbers actually happening.