(12-10-2013 04:17 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 05:22 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  I know AAC fans like the idea of adding VCU to balance out the basketball membership but what is in it for VCU?

The basketball played in the American and A10 is roughly of equivalent grade right now and VCU would face an uptick in travel costs in the American.

I just can't see the AAC as a move VCU would favor when right now they have a nice conference situation with Davidson, Richmond, George Mason and George Washington. A nice set of schools that VCU likes to stack up to.

St. Louis would be a better idea for the AAC since they could put them in the West division with Memphis and Tulsa. That is something I could see them biting on because it may be a while before the Big East expands. Today's A10 geography doesn't work for SLU at all.

The quality of basketball is a big step up. The AAC is probably the #3 conference in basketball. Money would be slightly higher---exposure would be way way way higher. VCU would have every conference game on national TV. Plus, the A-10 is already weakened after the Big East raid---and it likely the Big East will strike at least once more in the next year or so. It would be a solid move for VCU to have games against UConn, Cinci, Temple, and Memphis.

The RPI numbers this year have the AAC as the #9 conference not the #3 league. This is with Louisville still in the conference and before lower tier RPI schools like Tulane and East Carolina are added.

1) B12 (.6127)
2) B1G (.5881)
3) BE (.5797)
4) PAC (.5774)
5) ACC (.5667)
6) MWC (.5520)
7) A10 (.5515)
8) SEC (.5459)
9) AAC (.5401)
10) WCC (.5399)
11) MVC (.5304)

This VCU/Wichita speculation is driven by highly educated fans AAC realizing what would benefit the AAC. Aresco however hasn't added any basketball only school to date and I doubt a move like that has even been considered in passing by the league office.

The AAC has BYU & Army on its "A" list as football only additions. BYU most likely has no interest at this point. Army its hard to say but to compliment them it makes sense to add another all sport school so the numbers can be 14 in FB/12 BB.

To get your cut of the AAC TV money you have to have football, IMO. A non-FB school isn't going to get paid anything in the AAC.

(12-10-2013 10:48 AM)bigredmachine Wrote:  AAC expansion needs to get more media exposure in major markets. NIU offers the biggest with Chicago. Buffalo is also a major market. Rice doesn't make sense since you already have Houston. Ohio is in a small market. I think the best adds for the AAC would be NIU and Buffalo. That said, I don't think anything will happen until the law suits are settled and any other moves like Cincy and UConn are resolved.

To compare some of these MAC schools to existing members of the AAC.

-Buffalo (Tulane): A good academic school in an interesting TV market for the AAC. Buffalo in of itself isn't that large like New Orleans but as a regional market Western NY and South LA are pretty big markets.

-Ohio (Tulsa): A good academic school near good recruiting grounds. Ohio is 1 hour from Columbus and 2 hours from Cincinnati, the best recruiting grounds in Ohio. Tulsa is in a state of Oklahoma that has relatively good football recruiting overall.

-NIU (North Texas): A regional state school on the edge of a major media market. NIU doesn't draw without a huge amount of winning and isn't up to par with the academics found in the AAC.

If Army wants to join, Ohio with 8 bowl appearances and 13 NCAA tourney showings is the best draft pick left on the board for a 14th, IMO. They would also be nice to have in case Cincinnati leaves for the B12 or ACC to continue a presence in that state.

Buffalo has only been to 2 bowls and has zero NCAA appearances. The potential and academics are clearly there but they have to capitalize on it.

(12-10-2013 09:49 AM)CameramanJ Wrote:  I tend to think that VCU had a pretty sweet thing going with the A10 anyway.

Fixed it for you.

(12-10-2013 08:39 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 10:48 AM)bigredmachine Wrote:  

To compare some of these MAC schools to existing members of the AAC.

-Buffalo (Tulane): A good academic school in an interesting TV market for the AAC. Buffalo in of itself isn't that large like New Orleans but as a regional market Western NY and South LA are pretty big markets.

-Ohio (Tulsa): A good academic school near good recruiting grounds. Ohio is 1 hour from Columbus and 2 hours from Cincinnati, the best recruiting grounds in Ohio. Tulsa is in a state of Oklahoma that has relatively good football recruiting overall.

-NIU (North Texas): A regional state school on the edge of a major media market. NIU doesn't draw without a huge amount of winning and isn't up to par with the academics found in the AAC.

If Army wants to join, Ohio with 8 bowl appearances and 13 NCAA tourney showings is the best draft pick left on the board for a 14th, IMO. They would also be nice to have in case Cincinnati leaves for the B12 or ACC to continue a presence in that state.

Buffalo has only been to 2 bowls and has zero NCAA appearances. The potential and academics are clearly there but they have to capitalize on it.

When did North Texas join the AAC?

American candidates ranked by NCAA appearances

Ohio (13 appearances)
VCU (12 appearances)
Wichita St (10 appearances)
UMass (8 appearances)
NIU (3 appearances)
Buffalo (0 appearances)

The reality for the the AAC is there aren't any expansion candidates out there with the football support of ECU, Cincinnati, UCF or Houston out there, enough to move the needle in the sport.

Then basketball becomes a deciding factor for the AAC. UMass has a ranked basketball team right now poised to head to the NCAAs. As I was saying before if they could go on a Wichita State/VCU type run in hoops over the next 5 years coupled with improved football product that will be hard for the AAC to pass up.

Ohio could go to the NCAA's this year and would like to go to a final four with the amount of resources they've put behind the program but not having been to a Final 4 before hurts their program. The football product at Ohio is light years ahead of where UMass is though.

(12-10-2013 09:01 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 08:39 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 10:48 AM)bigredmachine Wrote:  

To compare some of these MAC schools to existing members of the AAC.

-Buffalo (Tulane): A good academic school in an interesting TV market for the AAC. Buffalo in of itself isn't that large like New Orleans but as a regional market Western NY and South LA are pretty big markets.

-Ohio (Tulsa): A good academic school near good recruiting grounds. Ohio is 1 hour from Columbus and 2 hours from Cincinnati, the best recruiting grounds in Ohio. Tulsa is in a state of Oklahoma that has relatively good football recruiting overall.

-NIU (North Texas): A regional state school on the edge of a major media market. NIU doesn't draw without a huge amount of winning and isn't up to par with the academics found in the AAC.

If Army wants to join, Ohio with 8 bowl appearances and 13 NCAA tourney showings is the best draft pick left on the board for a 14th, IMO. They would also be nice to have in case Cincinnati leaves for the B12 or ACC to continue a presence in that state.

Buffalo has only been to 2 bowls and has zero NCAA appearances. The potential and academics are clearly there but they have to capitalize on it.

When did North Texas join the AAC?

No and that is why NIU isn't a good fit because the school is like North Texas from an institutional profile perspective.

The MAC is a good fit for NIU institutionally. You are right there as the MAC would be better with 1 less Ohio and Michigan in it but that is only going to happen if someone leaves.

(12-10-2013 01:11 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 12:22 PM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 11:48 AM)westwolf Wrote:  Any addition of current MAC schools will simply reinforce the AAC's image of mediocrity.

Ding ding!!! Something we can ill afford at this point.

So if two - four teams leave the AAC where do you go then? MWC teams won't return your calls. Rebuild CUSA 2.0? The Sun Belt? Reality is the MAC probably has 2 - 4 of the best candidates left on the board to help the AAC maintain any perceived edge.

The main reason some MAC teams could be interesting to the AAC is that they are not CUSA teams. The AAC will simply become even more CUSA like if they keep adding CUSA schools. I think the AAC would like to be viewed as something more unique than just CUSA with a "Now New and Improved!!" sticker slapped on the logo.

On the other hand, MAC schools represent cold weather late season road games and, due to their location, probably wont the help the AAC in gaining traction with bowls--which are mostly located in the south.

Maybe NIU and Ohio (Cinci rivalry could develop). That a pair of schools with at least decent attendance and Ohio plays a little basketball. On the other hand, I could make arguments for schools like S Miss (despite the fact they suck right now), UTSA, Texas State, Arky State, FIU, UMass, and ODU. To me, they all make just as about as much sense.


My preference right now is to do nothing right now until I know what comes out of the NCAA Div-I meetings in Jan.

With NIU it would be totally different if they were averaging 50,000 a game like East Carolina. Then they would bring big football support to the AAC.

AAC strengths

FB (Cincinnati, Houston, ECU, UCF, USF)
Academics (SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Navy)
BB (Memphis, Connecticut, Temple)

There isn't any programs in CUSA, MAC, SBC, MVC, A10 that move the needle for the AAC in football. I'm not talking a one year performance but in overall program support which is different.

(12-10-2013 09:15 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 09:01 PM)HuskieTap22 Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 08:39 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 10:48 AM)bigredmachine Wrote:  

To compare some of these MAC schools to existing members of the AAC.

-Buffalo (Tulane): A good academic school in an interesting TV market for the AAC. Buffalo in of itself isn't that large like New Orleans but as a regional market Western NY and South LA are pretty big markets.

-Ohio (Tulsa): A good academic school near good recruiting grounds. Ohio is 1 hour from Columbus and 2 hours from Cincinnati, the best recruiting grounds in Ohio. Tulsa is in a state of Oklahoma that has relatively good football recruiting overall.

-NIU (North Texas): A regional state school on the edge of a major media market. NIU doesn't draw without a huge amount of winning and isn't up to par with the academics found in the AAC.

If Army wants to join, Ohio with 8 bowl appearances and 13 NCAA tourney showings is the best draft pick left on the board for a 14th, IMO. They would also be nice to have in case Cincinnati leaves for the B12 or ACC to continue a presence in that state.

Buffalo has only been to 2 bowls and has zero NCAA appearances. The potential and academics are clearly there but they have to capitalize on it.

When did North Texas join the AAC?

No and that is why NIU isn't a good fit because the school is like North Texas from an institutional profile perspective.

The MAC is a good fit for NIU institutionally. You are right there as the MAC would be better with 1 less Ohio and Michigan in it but that is only going to happen if someone leaves.

Why does the AAC need Ohio, or any other Ohio team when Cincinnati is already in the league? It seems if the intent is to create a best of the rest league, then Ohio is already covered with the clear cut #2 in the state. The upside seems minimal with the state already covered and especially since Cincinnati is superior to Ohio in both hoops and football.

(12-10-2013 09:24 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  With NIU it would be totally different if they were averaging 50,000 a game like East Carolina. Then they would bring big football support to the AAC.

AAC strengths

FB (Cincinnati, Houston, ECU, UCF, USF)
Academics (SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Navy)
BB (Memphis, Connecticut, Temple)

There isn't any programs in CUSA, MAC, SBC, MVC, A10 that move the needle for the AAC in football. I'm not talking a one year performance but in overall program support which is different.

Personally, a 6 team grab would be the boldest move possible that might actually pay dividends. In assuming BYU wont happen.

East

UConn
Cinci
Temple
Navy
Army
ECU
UCF
USF
Memphis
**VCU basketball only
**UMass basketball only


West

Houston
Tulsa
Tulane
SMU
Boise
New Mexico
SDSU
Fresno
UNLV

Nine game schedule. 8 division games and one crossover. Basketball is a round robin of home and homes (16 games) plus 4 crossover games. Non revenue sports are divisional play only other than where required to determine a champion.

The first nationwide conference. I think this is the one model that offers some media earnings hope for the G-5. I think one of the national sports networks can do something with such a league. Sort of like how ESPN made its name with the Big East---I think Fox, CBS-Sports (if they get some more subscribers), or NBC-Sports could carve out a lucrative niche as the place to go for news and coverage of the G5. Just as Fox News profited greatly by catering to a largely ignored conservative audience---there is a niche for a largely ignored G5 audience. A nationwide G5 league would be a perfect property for such a network. Build in a couple of shows that discuss the G5 leagues and make sure that G5 conversation takes up a third to a half of Saturday morning "Game Day" time---and guess what network G5 fans will flock to for pregame news.

(12-10-2013 09:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 09:24 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  With NIU it would be totally different if they were averaging 50,000 a game like East Carolina. Then they would bring big football support to the AAC.

AAC strengths

FB (Cincinnati, Houston, ECU, UCF, USF)
Academics (SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Navy)
BB (Memphis, Connecticut, Temple)

There isn't any programs in CUSA, MAC, SBC, MVC, A10 that move the needle for the AAC in football. I'm not talking a one year performance but in overall program support which is different.

Personally, a 6 team grab would be the boldest move possible that might actually pay dividends. In assuming BYU wont happen.

East

UConn
Cinci
Temple
Navy
Army
ECU
UCF
USF
Memphis
**VCU basketball only
**UMass basketball only

West

Houston
Tulsa
Tulane
SMU
Boise
New Mexico
SDSU
Fresno
UNLV


Nine game schedule. 8 division games and one crossover. Basketball is a round robin of home and homes (16 games) plus 4 crossover games. Non revenue sports are divisional play only other than where required to determine a champion.

The first nationwide conference. I think this is the one model that offers some media earnings hope for the G-5. I think one of the national sports networks can do something with such a league. Sort of like how ESPN made its name with the Big East---I think Fox, CBS-Sports (if they get some more subscribers), or NBC-Sports could carve out a lucrative niche as the place to go for news and coverage of the G5. Just as Fox News profited greatly by catering to a largely ignored conservative audience---there is a niche for a largely ignored G5 audience. A nationwide G5 league would be a perfect property for such a network. Build in a couple of shows that discuss the G5 leagues and make sure that G5 conversation takes up a third to a half of Saturday morning "Game Day" time---and guess what network G5 fans will flock to for pregame news.

I would like to see something like this develop but I don't think we'll see Army and Navy putting their Olympic sports in the conference. In a western-expansion scenario, Air Force would be a part of it. I think that you would be more likely to see something like this:

East

UConn
Cinci
Temple
Navy (football only)
Army (football only)
ECU
UCF
USF
Memphis
Tulane
**VCU basketball only
**Richmond/George Washington/Davidson basketball only


West

Houston
Air Force
Tulsa
Colorado State
SMU
Boise
New Mexico
SDSU
Fresno
UNLV

There is no need for cross-over games; we could go into pods if there is...

(12-10-2013 09:24 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  With NIU it would be totally different if they were averaging 50,000 a game like East Carolina. Then they would bring big football support to the AAC.

AAC strengths

FB (Cincinnati, Houston, ECU, UCF, USF)
Academics (SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Navy)
BB (Memphis, Connecticut, Temple)

There isn't any programs in CUSA, MAC, SBC, MVC, A10 that move the needle for the AAC in football. I'm not talking a one year performance but in overall program support which is different.

U.S. News has UConn ranked higher than SMU & Tulsa.

(12-10-2013 10:49 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 09:24 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  With NIU it would be totally different if they were averaging 50,000 a game like East Carolina. Then they would bring big football support to the AAC.

AAC strengths

FB (Cincinnati, Houston, ECU, UCF, USF)
Academics (SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Navy)
BB (Memphis, Connecticut, Temple)

There isn't any programs in CUSA, MAC, SBC, MVC, A10 that move the needle for the AAC in football. I'm not talking a one year performance but in overall program support which is different.

U.S. News has UConn ranked higher than SMU & Tulsa.

My guess is he didn't want 1 school being in more than one category. If so I would put cincy in bball category since they are in between temple and memphis IMO. Also, is tulane a smart private school? (Sorry for ignorance, I haven't really researched on anything Tulane)

In case you guys have forgotten Boise State and Co decided they didn't want to be apart of this conference so I don't see any of these western schools as options in the near future.

The American is seen as CUSA because we took the best options available which happens to be at that time members of CUSA. But also look at the two conferences mapped out they follow a very similar membership model covering most of the same areas. This model is good for a conference that is looking to replace schools as schools leave but will not be taken seriously as a conference because it is just a conference with schools looking to move up and leave the conference.

The only team I think the conference would add right now if they wanted to join is Army for football only. Adding several schools would make us worth more as a conference but we would also have more mouths to feed as well. No combination of schools we could add right now would bring enough value to increase our worth while not taking money out of the current members pockets.

If school leaves(Uconn and Cincy) even though i think it is very unlikely i think they would be replaced with Ohio and UMASS.

Schools that would be viable options if their product on the field improves making them worth something to the conference would be Umass UAB Charlotte USM Rice. But I don't think the conference will be around long enough in this present form for any invites to be handed out.

Army isn't joining the AAC.

The Conference USA campaign was a disaster. Army hasn't had an good alliance (along with a NC) since WW2.

Sorry, but Army can do better as an independent!

Perhaps, Towson and McNeese State are available.

(12-10-2013 11:04 PM)natibeast21 Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 10:49 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 09:24 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  With NIU it would be totally different if they were averaging 50,000 a game like East Carolina. Then they would bring big football support to the AAC.

AAC strengths

FB (Cincinnati, Houston, ECU, UCF, USF)
Academics (SMU, Rice, Tulsa, Navy)
BB (Memphis, Connecticut, Temple)

There isn't any programs in CUSA, MAC, SBC, MVC, A10 that move the needle for the AAC in football. I'm not talking a one year performance but in overall program support which is different.

U.S. News has UConn ranked higher than SMU & Tulsa.

My guess is he didn't want 1 school being in more than one category. If so I would put cincy in bball category since they are in between temple and memphis IMO. Also, is tulane a smart private school? (Sorry for ignorance, I haven't really researched on anything Tulane)

Yes, Tulane is a very good school. It's ranked slightly ahead of UConn & SMU. It's the top rated school in he conference. Navy is also ranked high, but it's in a separate category from the other schools.

(12-10-2013 11:40 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  Army isn't joining the AAC.

The Conference USA campaign was a disaster. Army hasn't had an good alliance (along with a NC) since WW2.

Sorry, but Army can do better as an independent!

Perhaps, Towson and McNeese State are available.

In know way did i say that Army would join and i don't expect them to. All i was saying is that Army would be the only school that the American would take right now IF they wanted to join.

(12-10-2013 11:29 PM)DBpirate Wrote:  In case you guys have forgotten Boise State and Co decided they didn't want to be apart of this conference so I don't see any of these western schools as options in the near future.

The American is seen as CUSA because we took the best options available which happens to be at that time members of CUSA. But also look at the two conferences mapped out they follow a very similar membership model covering most of the same areas. This model is good for a conference that is looking to replace schools as schools leave but will not be taken seriously as a conference because it is just a conference with schools looking to move up and leave the conference.

The only team I think the conference would add right now if they wanted to join is Army for football only. Adding several schools would make us worth more as a conference but we would also have more mouths to feed as well. No combination of schools we could add right now would bring enough value to increase our worth while not taking money out of the current members pockets.

If school leaves(Uconn and Cincy) even though i think it is very unlikely i think they would be replaced with Ohio and UMASS.

Schools that would be viable options if their product on the field improves making them worth something to the conference would be Umass UAB Charlotte USM Rice. But I don't think the conference will be around long enough in this present form for any invites to be handed out.

As long as the conference continues to follow the same failed regional 12-team G5 model that every other G5 follows, then the gap between the power conferences with respect to the number on the contract, the fans in stands, the bowls available, and exposure available will continue to slowly get worse. The regional model doesn't work for G5 conferences. Its as simple as that.

Over the last 20 years the gap between the media earnings of P-5 schools and G5 schools has grown from half a million to nearly 20 million. Add another 5 to 6 million increase for the new difference in BCS earnings under the new college playoff and that number earnings difference is closer to 25 million. The small regional model has presided over this and the G5 schools continue to cling to it. Why do schools that are 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 10th fiddles in their state think that playing other close by schools will result in more money from NATIONAL broadcasters? That model might be more valuable on the regional level----but the regional entities have minimal cash for programming that isn't pro-level. So, how much are you really going to get from regional broadcasters? The answer is---Not much. So why build a product that appeals to regional networks?

A large national G5 conference with most of the larger, better funded schools, is the only model with a prayer of chance. Its the only model that hasn't been tried and alowed to develop over multiple media cycles. It probably wont change the money significantly for the first cycle, but in a contract cycle or two---I believe such a model would quickly pull away from the low paying regional conferences. Why? Because national networks broadcast nationally. A national FBS conference makes sense for a national cable network.

Why schedule the MAC if the MAC has little relevance outside of the Ohio and Michigan? Why show the AAC if it has little relevance west of Texas? But if you have a product with teams across the country---north, south, east, and west---then a game in Florida might have a bearing on a team in California--thus it might get viewers in Cali. A game in Texas might be interesting to fans in New England because they are in the same conference and might meet UConn in the championship. Thus that far away game might pull more veiwers in NE that it would have otherwise. I just think its the only model that might offer hope the typical G5 school.

The national conference idea might work if you can get enough schools into it to keep travel costs to a minimum.

The biggest observation I have over the years I followed NCAA athletics when it comes to media markets is that they are overrated.

In basketball it comes down to programs. CUSA was for example a 3-4 NCAA conference when Marquette, Cincinnati and Louisville were playing in it. Schools like UAB and Charlotte were added to the league for their great media markets. Today's CUSA is a one bid league with UAB and Charlotte because all the major programs are gone.

Football is all about recruiting. Schools located in good recruiting states have an advantage but there are tiers of recruiting within states. In Florida you have the Big 3 of Miami, Florida State and Florida in recruiting then UCF and USF who play in the AAC and have some tradition get their share of power level talent. FAU and FIU get stuck with the scraps after the bigger Florida schools select, out of state P5s and G5s with more tradition like East Carolina.

Having a large media market in of itself doesn't equal potential. VCU and Wichita State have recently taken their game up a notch in men's basketball while ODU and Georgia State in larger markets haven't done anything recently after a couple of good runs. Gonzaga is in one of the smaller media markets of the WCC and Boise State one of the smaller in the Mountain West.

The AAC I think largely gets it and looks for programs and tradition over the largest possible media market. Otherwise FIU and Georgia State would be in the conference over ECU and Tulsa.

(12-11-2013 12:35 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-10-2013 11:29 PM)DBpirate Wrote:  In case you guys have forgotten Boise State and Co decided they didn't want to be apart of this conference so I don't see any of these western schools as options in the near future.

The American is seen as CUSA because we took the best options available which happens to be at that time members of CUSA. But also look at the two conferences mapped out they follow a very similar membership model covering most of the same areas. This model is good for a conference that is looking to replace schools as schools leave but will not be taken seriously as a conference because it is just a conference with schools looking to move up and leave the conference.

The only team I think the conference would add right now if they wanted to join is Army for football only. Adding several schools would make us worth more as a conference but we would also have more mouths to feed as well. No combination of schools we could add right now would bring enough value to increase our worth while not taking money out of the current members pockets.

If school leaves(Uconn and Cincy) even though i think it is very unlikely i think they would be replaced with Ohio and UMASS.

Schools that would be viable options if their product on the field improves making them worth something to the conference would be Umass UAB Charlotte USM Rice. But I don't think the conference will be around long enough in this present form for any invites to be handed out.

As long as the conference continues to follow the same failed regional 12-team G5 model that every other G5 follows, then the gap between the power conferences with respect to the number on the contract, the fans in stands, the bowls available, and exposure available will continue to slowly get worse. The regional model doesn't work for G5 conferences. Its as simple as that.

Over the last 20 years the gap between the media earnings of P-5 schools and G5 schools has grown from half a million to nearly 20 million. Add another 5 to 6 million increase for the new difference in BCS earnings under the new college playoff and that number earnings difference is closer to 25 million. The small regional model has presided over this and the G5 schools continue to cling to it. Why do schools that are 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 10th fiddles in their state think that playing other close by schools will result in more money from NATIONAL broadcasters? That model might be more valuable on the regional level----but the regional entities have minimal cash for programming that isn't pro-level. So, how much are you really going to get from regional broadcasters? The answer is---Not much. So why build a product that appeals to regional networks?

A large national G5 conference with most of the larger, better funded schools, is the only model with a prayer of chance. Its the only model that hasn't been tried and alowed to develop over multiple media cycles. It probably wont change the money significantly for the first cycle, but in a contract cycle or two---I believe such a model would quickly pull away from the low paying regional conferences. Why? Because national networks broadcast nationally. A national FBS conference makes sense for a national cable network.

Why schedule the MAC if the MAC has little relevance outside of the Ohio and Michigan? Why show the AAC if it has little relevance west of Texas? But if you have a product with teams across the country---north, south, east, and west---then a game in Florida might have a bearing on a team in California--thus it might get viewers in Cali. A game in Texas might be interesting to fans in New England because they are in the same conference and might meet UConn in the championship. Thus that far away game might pull more veiwers in NE that it would have otherwise. I just think its the only model that might offer hope the typical G5 school.

I agree with what you are saying but think about it why don't these MAC games matter nationally or the AAC matter out west? Because in the BCS there isn't a reason for these games to matter.

In the BCS era we have seen for AQ conferences their exposure, value for games, and tv revenue all increase dramatically while it has been pretty much stagnant for the Non-Aq schools. This is because in the BCS system AQ teams matter to every fan and a game from any area of the country can effect another team in a completely different area of the country. All these conferences are connected together because they are all fighting for the same prize thus creating an interest in each others conference. The BCS system did not do this for the Non-Aq schools and as a result they didnt matter to each other or the AQ conferences.

The CFP does the same thing for the G5 schools that was done with the AQ schools while not messing with the P5's nut with the access bowl slot. There is one prize that every G5 school is fighting for and connects all the G5 conferences together and creates interest in each others conference. As a result exposure, ratings, value, and Revenue should increase for most if not all of the G5 conferences because these games now bring a national appeal to them with the other G5 schools. In the BCS it didn't matter how your team did because there was no prize for being the best Non-AQ conference or team as a result who cared.

So if national interest is created for the g5 conferences through the CFP you can but you don't need a nation wide conference because the national interest is already there. A national conference increases the cost for schools/fans to travel to these games. Olympic sports also suffer with increased costs and travel. I don't necessarily think schools being nationwide will increase attendance either however I do agree it would benefit your bowl line up. Regional conferences are much cheaper to travel for schools, fans, and most importantly the students(remember them). You would see rivalries form between schools because of geography, you know people who go there, etc.. With games that are cheap to get to and seen as rivalries attendance will go up because people want to be part of the rivalry and be there in person to see it live. How many Auburn fans would want to say I saw the 2013 Iron Bowl live compared to i watched it on tv or i caught the highlights.

Think about it before we knew about the CFP did CUSA schools care about the MW or the sunbelt? NO Now knowing you are all fighting for the access bowl do you care about CUSA the MW or the Sunbelt? Still probably NO but you are watching them on TV and checking up on them online to see where your school stacks up.