|
Post by Village Aztec on Jan 8, 2013 15:36:17 GMT -8
Hirshman is earning 50% of what he should be paid and Sterk and earn here what he could in the Pac 10. We also need a OC.
So they know we need money and will try and get it. I was a cost accountand and gave acurate information and manage me did not know what to do with it, so how can they now what to do with it when they don't have good numbers to look at?
I am also an investor with a degree in Finance. You could have 10 people pick form 10 stocks and almost no one will pick the best stock. Why? Everyone will choose the wrong varaible.
Some time the over looked variable plays off. Giving to much weifgt to the wrong veriable kills the investment.
The house has the odds on thier side for gamblers. Is not the deck stacked against us?
We all know that. There is no fan that can do any better then out leaders.
Everyone needs to own a business to see how humbling it makes you.
What we need is luck and the Aztec curse has us all worried.
In this case we all could be wrong a year from now and right 3 years from now.
So this board may be unreadable the rest of the year.
We all beleive in something, but would you want to mortage your house for your beleive?
|
|
|
Post by some_aztec on Jan 8, 2013 15:45:19 GMT -8
It seems to me that this decision shouldn't be too difficult:
* Talk to the Big East...see what their opinion of their future is. Ideally, it should include only "Big City" schools across all time zones, that aren't currently represented in the "Big 5" conferences...such as Las Vegas, Fresno, Houston, Dallas, maybe Albuquerque or Fort Collins or Colorado Springs, etc. Less ideally, it will include schools such as Tulsa and other schools further east.
* Understand the TV contract deals for both conferences to the best of your abilities. Get the TV consultants to estimate payouts for each conference to the best of their ability.
--------------
So, if the Big East includes a decent payout, with long term plans for expansion out west, and focusing on big city teams, then go to the Big East
If the Big East payout is going to suck, and it only is going to include eastern schools, then sticking with the MWC would probably be the best...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2013 16:17:04 GMT -8
It won't be 64 by fiat. There's no better way to make themselves vulnerable for a restraint of trade lawsuit than that.
But aren't we getting just a tad ahead of ourselves in discussing that today?
|
|
|
Post by aztecbrothers on Jan 8, 2013 16:28:50 GMT -8
The bottom line is that all the MWC members want us to stay in our place. I would think that UCLA, USC, and the Arizona schools would want the same.
It would be a huge risk going back to the MWC and would spell doom for any future major Conference plays because this is our chance to create a national brand.
|
|
|
Post by Cwag on Jan 8, 2013 17:45:56 GMT -8
Staying in the MWC sends a message that SDSU is weak, scared and afraid of being bold and aggressive. These things are not attractive to the big conferences.
Right now we need big brass balls.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jan 8, 2013 17:47:13 GMT -8
Staying in the MWC sends a message that SDSU is weak, scared and afraid of being bold and aggressive. These things are not attractive to the big conferences. Right now we need big brass balls. Nor---I feel---are they attractive to recruits, fans or new coaching prospects.
|
|
|
Post by sugarrise on Jan 8, 2013 17:56:33 GMT -8
It would be a huge risk going back to the MWC and would spell doom for any future major Conference plays because this is our chance to create a national brand. Moving conferences doesn't create a national brand. Winning creates a national brand.
|
|
Aztec81
Starter
Aztec For Life
Posts: 105
|
Post by Aztec81 on Jan 8, 2013 18:00:30 GMT -8
Moving conferences doesn't create a national brand. Winning creates a national brand. Amen to that.
|
|
|
Post by azzfan on Jan 8, 2013 18:21:49 GMT -8
Sounds like we are a bubble team yet again.
|
|
|
Post by hbaztec on Jan 8, 2013 18:58:03 GMT -8
It would be a huge risk going back to the MWC and would spell doom for any future major Conference plays because this is our chance to create a national brand. Moving conferences doesn't create a national brand. Winning creates a national brand. However moving conferences gets more exposure.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jan 8, 2013 19:11:23 GMT -8
Moving conferences doesn't create a national brand. Winning creates a national brand. Not against the likes of Utah State, UNLV, Wyoming, Colorado State, and New Mexico it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jan 8, 2013 19:17:14 GMT -8
Staying in the MWC sends a message that SDSU is weak, scared and afraid of being bold and aggressive. These things are not attractive to the big conferences. Right now we need big brass balls. Nor---I feel---are they attractive to recruits, fans or new coaching prospects. You and cwag got that right 100%. If 1090 is right and SDSU has told the MGC we want back and we are just waiting on a vote it shows we have a weak and feeble mindset to the Big12, Pac12, recruits, fans, and coaching prospects. BY the way, speaking of coaches .....what kind of coaches do you think we can get for less than $100,000 because that's what we will be able to pay on the crumbs the MGC will give us.
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jan 8, 2013 19:19:03 GMT -8
Staying in the MWC sends a message that SDSU is weak, scared and afraid of being bold and aggressive. These things are not attractive to the big conferences. Right now we need big brass balls. Wouldn't the message depend upon about a thousand different considerations that you have no knowledge of? Are you coming alone or are others coming with you? BYU? Houston & SMU? UConn & Cincy for football only? Until you know that, you haven't a clue whether or not it is a smart move. And who will the nBE replace you with? Fresno & UNLV? BYU? Fresno, Nevada, UNLV, BYU & Boise State? Until you know that, you haven't a clue whether or not it is a smart move. What does the television consultant estimate your take home to be in the MWC vs. the BE? Until you know that, you haven't a clue whether or not it is a smart move. You notice a pattern? I'm not picking on you, I'm picking on everybody on every board. None of us have a frigging clue what is going on and yet we all have strong opinions as to what the right course is. And I'm no better -- in fact, I'm probably worse. I sent Mike Aresco a long email this morning telling him what to do. And strangely, he hasn't done it yet. Or at least he hasn't made it public -- I guess it's our secret for now. Me and Mike. Yoda out... .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2013 19:27:30 GMT -8
If 1090 is right and SDSU has told the MGC we want back and we are just waiting on a vote it shows we have a weak and feeble mindset Is that what Scott & BA said? The same guys who said all SDSU needed to do to return to the MWC was tell them we weren't leaving after all? Yeah, those dunces have great credibility on this.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jan 8, 2013 19:32:55 GMT -8
It would be a huge risk going back to the MWC and would spell doom for any future major Conference plays because this is our chance to create a national brand. Moving conferences doesn't create a national brand. Winning creates a national brand. But we know that staying with the MWC after MANY years of mediocrity and less than zero chance of rising in a meaningful way, AND with maybe even less money coming in than BB gets from the Big West, remaining in such a fruitless location would be pure folly.
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jan 8, 2013 19:34:56 GMT -8
Staying in the MWC sends a message that SDSU is weak, scared and afraid of being bold and aggressive. These things are not attractive to the big conferences. Right now we need big brass balls. Wouldn't the message depend upon about a thousand different considerations that you have no knowledge of? Are you coming alone or are others coming with you? BYU? Houston & SMU? UConn & Cincy for football only? Until you know that, you haven't a clue whether or not it is a smart move. And who will the nBE replace you with? Fresno & UNLV? BYU? Fresno, Nevada, UNLV, BYU & Boise State? Until you know that, you haven't a clue whether or not it is a smart move. What does the television consultant estimate your take home to be in the MWC vs. the BE? Until you know that, you haven't a clue whether or not it is a smart move. You notice a pattern? I'm not picking on you, I'm picking on everybody on every board. None of us have a frigging clue what is going on and yet we all have strong opinions as to what the right course is. And I'm no better -- in fact, I'm probably worse. I sent Mike Aresco a long email this morning telling him what to do. And strangely, he hasn't done it yet. Or at least he hasn't made it public -- I guess it's our secret for now. Me and Mike. Yoda out... . Yoda, I respect your takes when you come on this board. However, I have a sincere question to ask you. We know for a fact that West Virginia, Syracuse, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Boise State have to give millions to the Big East as exit fees. I believe it is around $5 million from each university. We also know that Mike Aresco may sell the naming rights of the Big East to the "Catholic 7". Consequently, even before a TV deal is done, we know that the Big East has a truckload of money to work with. Your belovbed MWC, on the other hand, just blew their wad on bringing back Boise State. They don't have the money reserves that the Big East has and they already have a TV deal in place. Give me your honest answer on this question.....Where in the world is the MWC going to find the kind of money needed to lure BYU, Houston, and SMU to the MWC?
|
|
|
Post by frustratedfan on Jan 8, 2013 19:38:46 GMT -8
If 1090 is right and SDSU has told the MGC we want back and we are just waiting on a vote it shows we have a weak and feeble mindset Is that what Scott & BA said? The same guys who said all SDSU needed to do to return to the MWC was tell them we weren't leaving after all? Yeah, those dunces have great credibility on this. No it was the guy who does their hourly updates.
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jan 8, 2013 19:52:41 GMT -8
Yoda, I respect your takes when you come on this board. However, I have a sincere question to ask you. We know for a fact that West Virginia, Syracuse, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Boise State have to give millions to the Big East as exit fees. I believe it is around $5 million from each university. We also know that Mike Aresco may sell the naming rights of the Big East to the "Catholic 7". Consequently, even before a TV deal is done, we know that the Big East has a truckload of money to work with. Your belovbed MWC, on the other hand, just blew their wad on bringing back Boise State. They don't have the money reserves that the Big East has and they already have a TV deal in place. Give me your honest answer on this question.....Where in the world is the MWC going to find the kind of money needed to lure BYU, Houston, and SMU to the MWC? First off, do not ever call the MWC, "my beloved MWC". There wasn't a person on the planet who was more butt hurt by the formation of the MWC -- including Karl Benson. And I'm not rooting for the MWC here -- I'm rooting for a specific outcome that, in theory, either conference could aim for but neither seems inclined to. That said, honestly, I don't have one dame clue how the MWC is going to afford BYU, et. al. If I'm the commissioner, then I would do them one at a time. I'm not saying that this would work but from here in the poor folks seats, this is the strategy that I'd hope to follow... If we can give three things to BYU, then maybe we get them. Those three things are these: 1. You let them keep their existing ESPN contract and opt totally out of the conference television package. That doesn't cost us any money and, in fact makes us some money as we'd have the rights to their away conference games -- which makes our secondary television contract more valuable. 2. You waive exit fees and notification requirements if they want to go to one of the Big 4 conferences. (I think you'd have to do that for everybody -- and that shouldn't be a problem.) 3. I forgot what 3 is but if I remember, I'll edit it back in later. Ha! I remembered. Let them have re-broadcast rights on BYU-TV.If you capture BYU, then the cost of acquiring Houston goes way down. Honestly, if they still want a deal, I'd be inclined to say "no" and then approach UConn and Cincy on a football only basis -- which would allow them to put basketball and the rest of their sports with the Catholic 7. Supposedly the C-7 are going to get big money out of their television contract so the two schools wouldn't demand a bunch to join a conference (football only) with BYU & BSU in it -- especially when the nBE is looking at backfilling with more C-USA schools. And at that point, Houston and SMU would pay to join -- not demand concessions. In other words, I don't think that it will cost us money to add these schools -- I think we will make money. Not much maybe but we are buying stability and credibility every bit as much as we are trying to profit financially. That said, the finances on all this stuff are way beyond me. I can understand financials but I can't begin to guess what the numbers are or how they are calculated. How'd I do? Yoda out... .
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jan 9, 2013 4:53:15 GMT -8
Yoda, I respect your takes when you come on this board. However, I have a sincere question to ask you. We know for a fact that West Virginia, Syracuse, Rutgers, Pittsburgh, Louisville, and Boise State have to give millions to the Big East as exit fees. I believe it is around $5 million from each university. We also know that Mike Aresco may sell the naming rights of the Big East to the "Catholic 7". Consequently, even before a TV deal is done, we know that the Big East has a truckload of money to work with. Your belovbed MWC, on the other hand, just blew their wad on bringing back Boise State. They don't have the money reserves that the Big East has and they already have a TV deal in place. Give me your honest answer on this question.....Where in the world is the MWC going to find the kind of money needed to lure BYU, Houston, and SMU to the MWC? First off, do not ever call the MWC, "my beloved MWC". There wasn't a person on the planet who was more butt hurt by the formation of the MWC -- including Karl Benson. And I'm not rooting for the MWC here -- I'm rooting for a specific outcome that, in theory, either conference could aim for but neither seems inclined to. That said, honestly, I don't have one dame clue how the MWC is going to afford BYU, et. al. If I'm the commissioner, then I would do them one at a time. I'm not saying that this would work but from here in the lol i'm an idiot seats, this is the strategy that I'd hope to follow... If we can give three things to BYU, then maybe we get them. Those three things are these: 1. You let them keep their existing ESPN contract and opt totally out of the conference television package. That doesn't cost us any money and, in fact makes us some money as we'd have the rights to their away conference games -- which makes our secondary television contract more valuable. 2. You waive exit fees and notification requirements if they want to go to one of the Big 4 conferences. (I think you'd have to do that for everybody -- and that shouldn't be a problem.) 3. I forgot what 3 is but if I remember, I'll edit it back in later. If you capture BYU, then the cost of acquiring Houston goes way down. Honestly, if they still want a deal, I'd be inclined to say "no" and then approach UConn and Cincy on a football only basis -- which would allow them to put basketball and the rest of their sports with the Catholic 7. Supposedly the C-7 are going to get big money out of their television contract so the two schools wouldn't demand a bunch to join a conference (football only) with BYU & BSU in it -- especially when the nBE is looking at backfilling with more C-USA schools. And at that point, Houston and SMU would pay to join -- not demand concessions. In other words, I don't think that it will cost us money to add these schools -- I think we will make money. Not much maybe but we are buying stability and credibility every bit as much as we are trying to profit financially. That said, the finances on all this stuff are way beyond me. I can understand financials but I can't begin to guess what the numbers are or how they are calculated. How'd I do? Yoda out... . Pipe dream. CBS holds all the cards, ESPN owns BYU. No way would ESPN cede BYU away games go CBS, which would have to happen plus no team would "pay"" to join a league that pays little. Competitive league or not, you need money to pay expenses. Further, CBS is under no pressure to pay more. They would up payouts a little but wouldn't junk the contract and run the risk of losing it in the re-bid. Too many other business reasons to list. Sent from my DROID RAZR using proboards
|
|
|
Post by Yoda on Jan 9, 2013 6:01:20 GMT -8
Pipe dream. CBS holds all the cards, ESPN owns BYU. No way would ESPN cede BYU away games go CBS, which would have to happen plus no team would "pay"" to join a league that pays little. Competitive league or not, you need money to pay expenses. Further, CBS is under no pressure to pay more. They would up payouts a little but wouldn't junk the contract and run the risk of losing it in the re-bid. Too many other business reasons to list. Reading is fundamental. I didn't say that it would work; in fact I specifically said, "I'm not saying that this would work but from here in the poor folks seats, this is the strategy that I'd hope to follow." As for why it wouldn't work, however, if BYU was allowed to keep its ESPN contract, then ESPN would not have to cede away its rights to BYU's road games as ESPN doesn't own those rights. Yoda out... .
|
|