(03-02-2018 11:43 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2018 11:08 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-02-2018 09:08 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-02-2018 06:32 AM)gulfcoastgal Wrote:  

(03-01-2018 04:21 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I can't blame Aresco for his P6 campaign, he is way-overpaid by the AAC to promote its interest, and it is in the interest of the AAC to be viewed as superior to the other G5 conferences. He's just doing his job.

That said, I don't blame Frazier either, because he is doing his job too. As much as Aresco might want to say that the P6 campaign is about "ourselves" and not the rest of the G5, when you say you are above the rest of the G5, which "P6" definitely does do, then you are doing something that harms NIU and the rest of the G5. Because instead of being behind just 5 conferences, Aresco is saying they are actually behind 6 conferences.

So Frazier is correctly combating the AAC's "P6" campaign because it does harm his conference/school interests.

I get where he's coming from in removing the top average performer (on field, ratings, budgets, salaries, attendance, recruiting...) the remaining collective average declines. As he is a proponent of a separate G5 playoff which would assumably have a separate collective TV deal, it is beneficial, maybe even necessary, to have the top conference (real or perceived) involved.

The AAC has been the top performing G5, but performance really has nothing to do with it. It wouldn't matter if it was the AAC or Sun Belt claiming it was "P6", the effect is the same: It implies that the other members of the G5 are below yet another conference, so it is an 'attack' so to speak, on their interests.

Then most every conference is doing it. The Mountain West tag line was “Above the Rest”. The Sunbelts is “together we rise” (Rise? Above who?). CUSA at one time used “Where champions are born”. They all suggest superiority. P6 is basically just a play on the popular made up P5/G5 term. It’s actually kinda clever.

It's not the same. "Above the rest' is amorphous and could just as easily apply to P5 as G5.

But the Aresco campaign is specific: it clearly is aimed at the other G5.

Thats not better---its even worse--becasue there is no metric that backs it up. The AAC is saying it is #6. Most people agree with that. Basically, the entire controversy revolves around the use of the word "Power" as a modifier. Honestly, its basically saying Pepsi doesnt like the Coca Cola ad campaign because it implies other soft drinks are less refreshing. Essentially, its an AD having a temper tantrum.