Conference realignment "Rumors" "tweets" "etc"

[puc86]

7 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

But with your suggestion of going independent we cannot even achieve decency. 

We’re already there, take a look around…

[Triple B]

10 hours ago, puc86 said:

I do not think fear should drive decisions

But that's exactly what you're doing here, possibly subconsciously, and have referenced it numerous times. You have a fear that football is already dying a slow death and want to exponentially speed up the process. Going Independent will do just that ...

[bulloni]

Wonder the feasibility of trying to get bigger fish to join by having a tiered payout/power system within the conference:

Tier 1: Notre Dame - $40 million a year, zero buyout if they want to leave, 33% of voting rights

Tier 2: Remaining 8 big 12 schools - $20 million a year, 1/2 the buyout if they want to leave, 33% voting rights

Tier 3: Current 11 AAC schools - $14 million a year, full buyout, 33% voting rights

Southeast Pod: USF, UCF, ECU, Tulane, Memphis

North Pod: Notre Dame, Cincinnati, WVU, Navy, Temple

Texas Pod: SMU, Houston, Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech

Great Plains Pod: Ok State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Tulsa

[puc86]

5 minutes ago, Triple B said:

But that's exactly what you're doing here, possibly subconsciously, and have referenced it numerous times. You have a fear that football is already dying a slow death and want to exponentially speed up the process. Going Independent will do just that ...

I do not have a fear of it I have empirical evidence that spans nearly a decade during which time we have tried winning, we have tried new coaches, we have tried new ads and even VPs and yet the trajectory remains the same while some preach stay the course. If there is something that is less intrusive or risky but starts an upward trend I’m all for that but I just refuse to pick the AAC as a sacred cow simply because we hastily threw together a conference while in distress 8 years ago and trying new things is scary. 

[NewEnglandBull]

24 minutes ago, puc86 said:

We’re already there, take a look around…

I didn’t say we had it “now” but we will NEVER have it if we are independent in the future.  

[NewEnglandBull]

11 minutes ago, bulloni said:

Wonder the feasibility of trying to get bigger fish to join by having a tiered payout/power system within the conference:

Tier 1: Notre Dame - $40 million a year, zero buyout if they want to leave, 33% of voting rights

Tier 2: Remaining 8 big 12 schools - $20 million a year, 1/2 the buyout if they want to leave, 33% voting rights

Tier 3: Current 11 AAC schools - $14 million a year, full buyout, 33% voting rights

Southeast Pod: USF, UCF, ECU, Tulane, Memphis

North Pod: Notre Dame, Cincinnati, WVU, Navy, Temple

Texas Pod: SMU, Houston, Baylor, TCU, Texas Tech

Great Plains Pod: Ok State, Kansas, Kansas State, Iowa State, Tulsa

Why would a big fish want to make less $? 

[Triple B]

16 minutes ago, puc86 said:

I do not have a fear of it I have empirical evidence that spans nearly a decade

Which is more strong evidence to support my hypothesis ... "Old Yeller" made me cry so I completely understand where you're coming from.

[puc86]

3 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

I didn’t say we had it “now” but we will NEVER have it if we are independent in the future.  

So at what point along the road map to solvency for Usf in the aac move from pipe dream to impossible? Never? For what reason is this held by you as the best shot of success no matter how long it is pursued and how long it fails? At some point in life you have to recognize your business model does not work and rather than never endingly tweaking things that don’t move the needle you have to pivot your model overall, that doesn’t have to be today, it doesn’t have to be tomorrow and it may not be in the next two years but there has to be a line drawn where you can’t just continue doing things the same way because of faith unless we want to go the religious model which is actually then aligned with a greater path towards success as an independent.

[puc86]

14 minutes ago, NewEnglandBull said:

Why would a big fish want to make less $? 

They wouldn’t there is no serious path where a smaller conference absorbs any part of a larger conference as they have the leverage and will counter with their take it or leave it offer to the parts of the lower conferences they would care to absorb.

[puc86]

5 minutes ago, Triple B said:

Which is more strong evidence to support my hypothesis ... "Old Yeller" made me cry so I completely understand where you're coming from.

I think it’s just a where we are in our lives type of thing and probably how we got there as well. If I was in the twilight of my life living on a pension I get why do the right thing don’t rock the boat and just see where life takes you looks appealing. That’s just not me, if something doesn’t work you change it and the best things to try and change are completely failing situations because there really is no downside or reason to fear failure. Pick any metrics that would be a kpi and Usf athletics isn’t hitting a single one and has never done so in the AAC at some point you have to ask with all other things being addressed if correlation isn’t in fact causation.