There doesn't really have to be a motive. He would be perfectly happy if it did well. It is just that he is not going to put the resources into it (by paying a buy-out to a losing coach and hiring a new one) since it is such a small part of the revenue. Look at it from a purely business standpoint.
I think it is a mistake to let it tank because I think ISU has a better chance of success in conference in basketball than it does in football. It has pretty much always been that way. I think if you let the program tank, you are hurting your overall support for ISU athletics now and in the future. However, I can see a money-first person like JP doing that from a business standpoint.
Also, not many here say anything about it, but I don't see JP staying at ISU forever. He may be more interested in making an immediate impact (which he has) and then moving on to something bigger. MBB may not have a big priority with him because he can still show success in other areas even if it tanks. He may not truly have major concerns about ISU athletics 4 or 5 years down the road. Why would he? At some point he will move on.
If he did not make a move about GMac this year, I don't see him making one in the future......not unless for some reason ISU MBB becomes a bigger priority to him. If donations to the Athletic Department start to drop significantly because of the debacle that ISU MBB has become and is going to continue to be in the future under GMac, then maybe he will make a change. I just don't see that happening. If CPR has any success at all, JP may not need for the ISU MBB program to get better. If they win fine....if they don't.......no big deal. Why allocate resources to it's success? Sucks for those of us that are ISU MBB fans, but there are other schools.
Good post. I think this is right on the money actually. I underestimated JP's bean-counter mentality. Now that I understand the 6% conversation Deace had with Pollard and the argument Deace was making this morning I agree with you and him. The precedent is set that no negative financial activity can occur for a program that only provides 6% of revenue. Like Deace said, next year when it’s 5.5% the same argument can be made. And the year after. And the year after.
Really by saying that the statement is made that Greg will be here regardless because it’s too expensive to fire him. Which is fine. If that is the case and the fans get frustrated enough the only option will be to stop buying tickets and donating to the point that 6% goes negative or starts to impact football. The impetus has been put on the fans at this point and that’s fine.