(05-08-2014 09:53 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I'm amazed with some of the guff we're taking from the likes of cincy fans... We've been playing Cincy at least semi-regularly since the 50's. If we can get the football team back on the right track we'll be one of the best additions that came into the AAC (besides maybe UCF & Memphis)

ive been positive towards tulsa but let's not get carried away, id firmly have houston and navy above tulsa even if tulsa gets better in football

(05-09-2014 09:04 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 09:53 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I'm amazed with some of the guff we're taking from the likes of cincy fans... We've been playing Cincy at least semi-regularly since the 50's. If we can get the football team back on the right track we'll be one of the best additions that came into the AAC (besides maybe UCF & Memphis)

ive been positive towards tulsa but let's not get carried away, id firmly have houston and navy above tulsa even if tulsa gets better in football

It's hard to compare schools like Tulsa and Houston. They are very different institutions, both have their positives and negatives, but both really add something to the conference. Same goes for Navy and everyone else really.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

(05-09-2014 08:53 AM)uldn Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 10:35 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(05-08-2014 08:29 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  The AAC will be solid on field but as the huge disparity in money between the P5 and G5 (us) goes on year after year it will get more and more difficult to compete at that level.

Also...it will be hard for many fans of each AAC school to really care about the conference games because:
a: there are no marquee names in this conference
b: hardly any regional rivalries (i.e. people in Cincy could care less about Tulsa, Tulane, Houston, etc and the feeling I'm sure is reciprocated)
c: mid major football games are hard to get up for

Our contract will be renogiated in 5 years

A. Boise, Louisville, cincy, South Carolina, Baylor weren't powers in the slightest 10 years ago and Oregon & A&M were good names but weren't marquee.. And 20 years ago Colorado, Houston, Pitt & SMU were marquee.. "Marquee" changes, beat the big boys some of our teams will be marquee

B. Cincy has a "rival" but you don't think they are good enough for cincy. If Memphis had the football reputation of Houston or won the bcs like ucf last year. We both know you'd have been way more excited to call Memphis vs cincy a rivalry

C. I'm curious how a total of 7 years have put cincy fans on a higher platform that they are too good for other teams. I honestly think you need to stop worrying about classification and start just supporting team who's technically been mid-major 90% of its history

Actually it was a little before 10 years ago that Louisville starting making great headway. Matter of fact, 11 years ago they ended the season at 11-1, ranked #7 in the last AP poll before the bowl games, won their bowl game against a top 10 team. They continued to stay ranked and do very well after that until the disaster hire of Krag. That was a horrible 3 years but they bounced back very quickly. I don't see them falling again as Jurich will not make that kind of mistake again.

I do agree though that the money might be a big issue down the line. It's very hard to move up the ladder and make drastic improvements without a big income. The CUSA income we had years ago and even the BE income was nothing compared to the other top conferences. It not for the community and alumni of Louisville being willing to donate so much and have great investments, we would not have been able to grow as we did. You have to get the money from somewhere to invest into growing the programs, getting the best coaches, having facilities that will lure the recruits etc.

It's not just the money (although it's a big one). Once recruits realize that a G5 team can go 12-0 and not even sniff the playoff, and possibly even the "Access Bowls," recruiting will start to fall off, widening the chasm even further. I also think eventually the P5 will use their "autonomy" to eliminate the 85 scholarship limit, or at least, greatly increase it. That way they'll have all the room they need to sign 99.9% of the best players. They can't bury us completely under the current rules, so they're changing the rules so they can bury us by merely outspending us.

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

Exactly. That and market, which in turn limits TV money.

(05-08-2014 07:48 PM)Geotag Wrote:  Just waiting till our Big 12 invite comes. Should hear something by then. Chilling for the time being. This is the Golden Age for Memphis

Thought it was PAC 12?

(05-08-2014 07:48 PM)Geotag Wrote:  Just waiting till our Big 12 invite comes. Should hear something by then. Chilling for the time being. This is the Golden Age for Memphis

You most likely will be collecting SS payments before that happens. LOL! Really, the line will be long to move up, and mempiss is way back near the end of it.LOL!

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

(05-09-2014 11:46 AM)don41 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

UCONN has one of the top attendances in this conference. Last year at 3-9 we averaged over 30,000. I believe the average the past 5 seasons is around 36,000. We also count actual butts in the seats as opposed to ticket sales. I'm not familiar with Temple's numbers.

(05-09-2014 11:46 AM)don41 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

houston average 30k in a 30k stadium the past several years. tulsa averages 19-22k. i don't consider a 10k gap similar by any measure

and uconn averages like 35k on bad teams.. are you just making these numbers up on stereotypes...

(05-09-2014 11:46 AM)don41 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

Your student population and living alumni base just doesn't support rapid growth.

I am tired of the word "mid major" being used to describe the American Conference. I wish the mods would delete that term or post everytime it is used.... in any context. The more that term is used or the terms G5,P5, and accepted, the easier it will be for class identification to be noticed and accepted by joe public.

This conference has the chance to be a very good conference in all sports. I know football drives the TV revenue, but we still have a good group of Universities who like competing at the highest level. Let's not give a few presidents/AD's the ammo to seperate us from the other conferences striving to compete at the highest level. Brand recognition goes a lot further than you think in recruiting and we need to win more and get our brand out there.

From the American Hospital Association guidelines when describing a patient's condition; the American conference is Fair: Vital signs are stable and within normal limits. Patient is conscious, but may be uncomfortable. Indicators are favorable.

(05-09-2014 11:49 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:46 AM)don41 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

UCONN has one of the top attendances in this conference. Last year at 3-9 we averaged over 30,000. I believe the average the past 5 seasons is around 36,000. We also count actual butts in the seats as opposed to ticket sales. I'm not familiar with Temple's numbers.

Not true, actually virtually no one counts butts in seats. (And before anyone says anything, yes USF's attendance was waaaay down last year also) See below:

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/...i8.twitter

Last season UConn football, which posted a 3-9 record, drew an average of 22,024 fans, down 5 percent from a year earlier, according to data from the Capital Region Development Authority. That number represents patrons who actually showed up at the turnstile. UConn put last year's average football attendance at 34,676.

(05-09-2014 12:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:49 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:46 AM)don41 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

UCONN has one of the top attendances in this conference. Last year at 3-9 we averaged over 30,000. I believe the average the past 5 seasons is around 36,000. We also count actual butts in the seats as opposed to ticket sales. I'm not familiar with Temple's numbers.

Not true, actually virtually no one counts butts in seats. (And before anyone says anything, yes USF's attendance was waaaay down last year also) See below:

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/...i8.twitter

Last season UConn football, which posted a 3-9 record, drew an average of 22,024 fans, down 5 percent from a year earlier, according to data from the Capital Region Development Authority. That number represents patrons who actually showed up at the turnstile. UConn put last year's average football attendance at 34,676.

Those numbers simply are not right. I went to every single home game. Michigan was 42,000 (extra seats), Maryland was around 38/39 and Louisville was decent (36 or so). So in order to get to 22,000 we would have had to have 0 people show up for the second half of the season, which didn't happen. Though, Memphis was sparse, about 21,000.

And we had 28,000 season ticket holders - no way 6,000 on average didn't show up (not counting multi-game packages sold due to Michigan and individuals).

And to answer the OP, I like the American conference. Like it, don't love it. Like the underdog role. Hate how it's termed as "mid major" by some, "G5" by others, or "non power". These are just arbitrary made up terms coined by those with an agenda, such as the so called "power 5" commissioners and others in the media. As if somehow USF, UC, and UConn went from power programs to mid major programs overnight last July 1st when absolutely nothing changed in their programs other than the fact they went from the Big East to the American (which was actually still the Big East). I was upset USF got left behind, but I have somewhat come to terms with that. I feel the AAC competitively will be as good or nearly as good as the Big East. I just wish the AAC was able to hang on to a top bowl game and better revenues, but oh well, what's the use complaining about that now. At least there still is an access point with enough wins.

(05-09-2014 12:30 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:49 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:46 AM)don41 Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 09:17 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  The only downside about Tulsa is the fanbase. That limits potential. Its like Wake Forest in many regards.

With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

UCONN has one of the top attendances in this conference. Last year at 3-9 we averaged over 30,000. I believe the average the past 5 seasons is around 36,000. We also count actual butts in the seats as opposed to ticket sales. I'm not familiar with Temple's numbers.

Not true, actually virtually no one counts butts in seats. (And before anyone says anything, yes USF's attendance was waaaay down last year also) See below:

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/...i8.twitter

Last season UConn football, which posted a 3-9 record, drew an average of 22,024 fans, down 5 percent from a year earlier, according to data from the Capital Region Development Authority. That number represents patrons who actually showed up at the turnstile. UConn put last year's average football attendance at 34,676.

Those numbers simply are not right. I went to every single home game. Michigan was 42,000 (extra seats), Maryland was around 38/39 and Louisville was decent (36 or so). So in order to get to 22,000 we would have had to have 0 people show up for the second half of the season, which didn't happen. Though, Memphis was sparse, about 21,000.

And we had 28,000 season ticket holders - no way 6,000 on average didn't show up (not counting multi-game packages sold due to Michigan and individuals).

Season ticket holders don't show up in poor years. USF also had about 22K or so season ticket holders and not all of them showed up every game...many stayed home.

PS. I'm not trying to slam UConn. I love UConn as a program. My only point is that no one counts only butts in seats (despite cries on internet boards that thier team counts butts in seats). Simply not true. Every team fudges the numbers. Some more than others, but no one counts every single body that comes through a turnstile and goes exactly at that number. Most programs make an educated guess at many of the numbers. This is well documented.

(05-09-2014 12:32 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:30 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:49 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:46 AM)don41 Wrote:  With the recent exception of SMU BB this past year, the Tulsa fan base has been very similar in size to that of SMU, Houston and Tulane for both BB & FB for several years. Tulsa has not always had the lowest fan turnout on a weekly basis as falsely assumed by many who post on this board. All of us have much room for improvement.

In regards to FB, I am curious about the actual attendance at Temple and UCONN games.

UCONN has one of the top attendances in this conference. Last year at 3-9 we averaged over 30,000. I believe the average the past 5 seasons is around 36,000. We also count actual butts in the seats as opposed to ticket sales. I'm not familiar with Temple's numbers.

Not true, actually virtually no one counts butts in seats. (And before anyone says anything, yes USF's attendance was waaaay down last year also) See below:

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/...i8.twitter

Last season UConn football, which posted a 3-9 record, drew an average of 22,024 fans, down 5 percent from a year earlier, according to data from the Capital Region Development Authority. That number represents patrons who actually showed up at the turnstile. UConn put last year's average football attendance at 34,676.

Those numbers simply are not right. I went to every single home game. Michigan was 42,000 (extra seats), Maryland was around 38/39 and Louisville was decent (36 or so). So in order to get to 22,000 we would have had to have 0 people show up for the second half of the season, which didn't happen. Though, Memphis was sparse, about 21,000.

And we had 28,000 season ticket holders - no way 6,000 on average didn't show up (not counting multi-game packages sold due to Michigan and individuals).

Season ticket holders don't show up in poor years. USF also had about 22K or so season ticket holders and not all of them showed up every game...many stayed home.

PS. I'm not trying to slam UConn. I love UConn as a program. My only point is that no one counts only butts in seats (despite cries on internet boards that thier team counts butts in seats). Simply not true. Every team fudges the numbers. Some more than others, but no one counts every single body that comes through a turnstile and goes exactly at that number. Most programs make an educated guess at many of the numbers. This is well documented.

I am about 90% sure we count butts in the seats. It's not hard, every ticket is scanned when you come in. And, like I said, I was at every game...there is no way that number is remotely right...1/4 of season tickets holders staying home EVERY GAME, on average, when we had Mich/Maryland/L'Ville/Rut just didn't happen.

(05-09-2014 01:26 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:32 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:30 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 11:49 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  UCONN has one of the top attendances in this conference. Last year at 3-9 we averaged over 30,000. I believe the average the past 5 seasons is around 36,000. We also count actual butts in the seats as opposed to ticket sales. I'm not familiar with Temple's numbers.

Not true, actually virtually no one counts butts in seats. (And before anyone says anything, yes USF's attendance was waaaay down last year also) See below:

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/...i8.twitter

Last season UConn football, which posted a 3-9 record, drew an average of 22,024 fans, down 5 percent from a year earlier, according to data from the Capital Region Development Authority. That number represents patrons who actually showed up at the turnstile. UConn put last year's average football attendance at 34,676.

Those numbers simply are not right. I went to every single home game. Michigan was 42,000 (extra seats), Maryland was around 38/39 and Louisville was decent (36 or so). So in order to get to 22,000 we would have had to have 0 people show up for the second half of the season, which didn't happen. Though, Memphis was sparse, about 21,000.

And we had 28,000 season ticket holders - no way 6,000 on average didn't show up (not counting multi-game packages sold due to Michigan and individuals).

Season ticket holders don't show up in poor years. USF also had about 22K or so season ticket holders and not all of them showed up every game...many stayed home.

PS. I'm not trying to slam UConn. I love UConn as a program. My only point is that no one counts only butts in seats (despite cries on internet boards that thier team counts butts in seats). Simply not true. Every team fudges the numbers. Some more than others, but no one counts every single body that comes through a turnstile and goes exactly at that number. Most programs make an educated guess at many of the numbers. This is well documented.

I am about 90% sure we count butts in the seats. It's not hard, every ticket is scanned when you come in. And, like I said, I was at every game...there is no way that number is remotely right...1/4 of season tickets holders staying home EVERY GAME, on average, when we had Mich/Maryland/L'Ville/Rut just didn't happen.

You're right, they count scanned tickets, but that is only one portion of announced attendance. Support staff, players, media, bands, students, and many other groups and various people that did not go the scanned process, which at many stadiums are estimated or should I say very generously guesstimated. You would be very surprised to find out how much guesstimating goes on in announced attendance. Also counted is season tickets whether or not they showed up. Every school does this to a certain extent. That is why you get discrepancies in actual attendance (if you can even get that from your school) and announced. THIS IS COMMON PRACTICE BY EVERYONE.

(05-09-2014 02:28 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 01:26 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:32 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:30 PM)uconnwhaler Wrote:  

(05-09-2014 12:22 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Not true, actually virtually no one counts butts in seats. (And before anyone says anything, yes USF's attendance was waaaay down last year also) See below:

http://www.hartfordbusiness.com/article/...i8.twitter

Last season UConn football, which posted a 3-9 record, drew an average of 22,024 fans, down 5 percent from a year earlier, according to data from the Capital Region Development Authority. That number represents patrons who actually showed up at the turnstile. UConn put last year's average football attendance at 34,676.

Those numbers simply are not right. I went to every single home game. Michigan was 42,000 (extra seats), Maryland was around 38/39 and Louisville was decent (36 or so). So in order to get to 22,000 we would have had to have 0 people show up for the second half of the season, which didn't happen. Though, Memphis was sparse, about 21,000.

And we had 28,000 season ticket holders - no way 6,000 on average didn't show up (not counting multi-game packages sold due to Michigan and individuals).

Season ticket holders don't show up in poor years. USF also had about 22K or so season ticket holders and not all of them showed up every game...many stayed home.

PS. I'm not trying to slam UConn. I love UConn as a program. My only point is that no one counts only butts in seats (despite cries on internet boards that thier team counts butts in seats). Simply not true. Every team fudges the numbers. Some more than others, but no one counts every single body that comes through a turnstile and goes exactly at that number. Most programs make an educated guess at many of the numbers. This is well documented.

I am about 90% sure we count butts in the seats. It's not hard, every ticket is scanned when you come in. And, like I said, I was at every game...there is no way that number is remotely right...1/4 of season tickets holders staying home EVERY GAME, on average, when we had Mich/Maryland/L'Ville/Rut just didn't happen.

You're right, they count scanned tickets, but that is only one portion of announced attendance. Support staff, players, media, bands, students, and many other groups and various people that did not go the scanned process, which at many stadiums are estimated or should I say very generously guesstimated. You would be very surprised to find out how much guesstimating goes on in announced attendance. Also counted is season tickets whether or not they showed up. Every school does this to a certain extent. That is why you get discrepancies in actual attendance (if you can even get that from your school) and announced. THIS IS COMMON PRACTICE BY EVERYONE.

You are saying season tickets are counted, when I can prove to you that we don't count them unless they show up (e.g. 22,000 announced attendance against Memphis with 28,000 season tickets holders). I know most schools totally fudge numbers, I WISH WE DID - it is much better for P.R.