Attackcoog
Moderator
Posts: 44,846
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2880
I Root For: Houston
Location: |
RE: The "Whine about Aresco" Thread
(05-27-2013 06:49 AM)TripleA Wrote: (05-26-2013 09:14 AM)Attackcoog Wrote: (05-26-2013 08:39 AM)TripleA Wrote: (05-25-2013 10:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: (05-25-2013 09:04 PM)TripleA Wrote: Attack, you're still misunderstanding the tie-in process. There is no contest going on between the AAC, the B12 and the SEC to get spots for the Liberty Bowl, so there is no 50-50, or any other kind of odds, dependent on who is the better negotiating team.
Rather, it is likely going to be the B12 against the SEC, IF both the B12 and the SEC decide to commit to it, with an acceptable (to the Liberty) level opponent. IF they don't, then the AAC will get a spot. It's that simple, and is the EXACT SAME SITUATION that is happening for every spot we want, outside the Beef and B'Ham (P5 doesn't want them), and probably the Aresco/Marlins Bowl, which we are looking to create, if we can get a suitable opponent.
Beyond that, we have no good news, NOT b/c we started late, or b/c we can't negotiate, but b/c ALL the good bowls are trying to get P5 tie-ins.
It has been reported that the SEC is considering dropping the Liberty. That's why it is so quiet. The Liberty is waiting on a decision, and the SEC won't give it until they get everything else straightened out.
We are probably not having any bowl announcements until the P5 announce theirs.
Not sure why you think I dont understand it. Most people around here think its going to be an certain AAC bowl. I think theres a pretty good chance that it wont be. The Big 12 sources quoted by Vingle in his article from Friday disagreed as to wheather it would be a B-12 vs AAC or a Big-12 vs SEC matchup. Thats where I got 50-50 from. Im very aware that the Liberty would go with the latter if it was avaialble. Erhart all but said that publically a few weeks ago.
As I said earlier, I pretty much have ZERO expectations at this point.
B/c you keep saying things that lead me to believe you think we are all negotiating to get tie-ins, and if we negotiate better, or earlier, we might do better. That is not what is going on. We have already approached every bowl and made our pitch, a long time ago.
What is happening is we are waiting on the P5 and bowls to decide which slots they are getting. We will not have anything definite until that happens. So, there is no real back-and-forth thing going on. There is absolutely no way to guess odds. Either the SEC decides to keep the slot, or not. It will depend completely on what other bowl tie-ins they get above it.
As for whether we get the Liberty, I think we will. Dan Wolken reported a few weeks ago that he thought the SEC would drop the Liberty. Who knows? But it is not going to depend on whether we get in there and convince a bowl to take us over a P5 conference.
Here's the other thing that makes me think you don't understand the process. You keep agonizing that CUSA and the MWC wind up with better tie-ins than we will. It's possible, but it is not b/c they are better at negotiating, as your posts indicate. It will be b/c they were willing to take a bowl slot that nobody in the P5 wanted. Meanwhile, we're aiming for better bowls that are contested. And we are sitting in the footprint of every P5 conference except the P12. The MWC is not.
This is exactly what I am talking about. We are waiting to see what the P5 will do. The results from that strategy are perfectly predictable. Banowsky didn't wait to see what the P5 would do and he didn't find a slot the P5 "didn't want". Banowsk thought outside the box and BOUGHT a slot. He founded the Heart of Dallas Charity, and then worked with the Dallas mayor to utilize the charity as a vehicle to take over the old Ticket City Bowl. Now he is working with university and city officials in Boca Raton to create another slot for CUSA.
You keep saying we have done everything possible. No, we really havnt. Banowsky found a way--and he didnt have 100 million dollar realignment fund or a line up with 4 former BCS schools to work with. What we have done is conducted ourselves as if we are a power conference when we are not a power confernece. To a degree, I dont see the leadership as stupid--I see it more as an issue of too much pride. Options like uneven payout sharing, offering to increase the payout of a lower bowl-or doing both-to the best of my knowledge were never attempted.
I know you think very highly of the conference leadership, but i am far less impressed. I lost confidence in the leadership group some time ago. This is the same group that knew what was in the pre-nup yet virtually guaranteed we wouldnt lose the Big East name. This is the same group that knew what was in that prenup but didnt have the new name ready to go when we lost the name. I dont blame them (I say them, because I think its not all on Aresco, the presidents have some issues too) for everything. There are some things that nobody could stop (Rutgers was going to B1G, nobody could have stopped that), but there are certainly things that could have been done differently that would have had a positive impact on our current situation. After closely watching the leadership in action for two years, I have zero expectations at this point.
While I have no expectations, I do have hopes. As fans, we always have hope. Given the landscape, and the current strategy, the only hope I have is that there is a way to capitalize on the open slots that are guaranteed to occur above us as a result of the selection committee filling the access bowls and playoffs. Do I have complete confidence that our leadership will capitalize on those opportunities? After watching the last two years of Big East trials and tribulations, no--I am not confident at all that we will find a way to capitalize on the bowl openings that occur above us---but I am hopeful.
We are just not going to see this the same, so this is my last response.
Having to wait on the P5 bowl situation before settling ours is NOT the same as waiting around and doing nothing to make things better. And you keep harping on Banowsky buying a bowl, while we apparently do nothing. You don't even know who the Heart of Dallas opponent will be yet, so let's just wait to see how things turn out, before you crown Banowsky the champ.
And you discount the effort being made with the Marlins Bowl, before you even know the result.
As for Aresco and the AAC admin, I don't think highly of them at all. I don't think much of anything positive or negative on the big issues, b/c it's too early to assess their performance. Regardless of who was commissioner, we were still going to lose AQ, we were still going to lose the schools we lost, and therefore, we were going to get a TV deal much less than what we had originally hoped.
Bowls, we don't know yet, but it was easy to predict we would lose the best ones, b/c the P5 lost higher slots to the new CFB system, and they also increased the size of their conferences (except the B12). And all but the P12 share our footprint (unlike the MWC).
On the lesser issues, I disagree with Aresco about the name "American." I think his apparent obsession with it is dumb, and I think he didn't recognize the wish of most former CUSA schools to create some separation there.
I also think Aresco's push for the Palestra is idiotic. I understand his desire for the conference to look good on TV, but the Palestra would be an uncomfortable experience for the fans who actually attend, and I think he is ignoring that. Too slanted toward TV?
I also disagree with his decision to keep the HQs in Providence. However, all of these things are minor compared to the reasons most people bash Aresco here, and those major things are not something he could have done much about.
As far as bowls, again, not much room to work for him. We're just in a crappy situation. But b/c you haven't heard anything publicly, you assume that the AAC guys started too late, did a crappy job of negotiating, don't know what they are doing, etc.
On that point, I strongly disagree. The reason I feel that way is that Aresco (+ AAC staff) has had several ADs and presidents, among others, working with him behind the scenes to get things done. All of them can't be stupid and incompetent. And Aresco and others sgtarted discussing our bowl situation as soon as he came here, and they started actively working on it not long after that.
Of course, a few other issues stole the limelight, but that doesn't mean they weren't still working on bowl games and everything else. You seem to think b/c you haven't heard much positive about bowls, tht we obviously aren't doing a good job, or aren't trying hard enough. I know better than that.
You also seem to think that the end result of our bowl games will be the measuring stick for how well they did. Again, I disagree, b/c nothing was going to stop the Russell, Pinstripe, etc. from getting tie-ins with the P5.
I also know that the AAC bowl situation was discussed at the spring meeting, in great detail, and the ADs and presidents came away feeling encouraged about it. I don't know the details, b/c again, nothing much is settled, but that certainly is a better reaction than it would be if they thought nothing much was being accomplished, as you do.
Look, I respect your opinion. I just think you are drawing conclusions based on the unfortunate bowl position we are in, and based on assumptions before everything is settled.
lol...Of course I am! Thats what we do here in the off season. 
Given your info, Im probably wrong on the starting late issue and I am bouyed to hear that the AD's were happy with the bowl information they recieved in the meetings. I suspect we will have a much better feel for our bowl situation within a few weeks--in fact, we could get some indications of what some of the P-5 are doing perhaps as soon as this week or next. .
(This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 12:01 PM by Attackcoog.)
|
|
![[Image: slumsny-1a.jpg]](http://lebbeuswoods.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/slumsny-1a.jpg)
