YNot
All American
Posts: 4,671
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 298
I Root For: BYU
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-10-2014 10:21 AM)ECBrad Wrote: You increase your value per member by making additions that are at least if not more valuable than the existing product. If we did anything more than taking the top of the MWC we'd just be hurting ourselves. Even those additions would be questionable.
May be the first step is grabbing BYU and Air Force? That gets the conference to a manageable 14 teams. You would likely increase the TV deal and only have to split it with two more institutions. In BYU, you get the best non-P5 team that isn't already in the American. With Air Force, you bring the Air Force-Navy connection and a logical travel partner for BYU.
You bring into the conference some good matchups for inventory for the TV folks: BYU-Cincinnati, Navy-Air Force, etc.
Then, you can sit back and see if you want to go after any more targets.
May be you go after BYU, Air Force, Gonzaga, and Wichita St. from the get go. This gives added comfort for BYU and Air Force to jump because they will have closer competition for Olympic sports. And, you eliminate one of BYU's main motivations to stay in the WCC by bringing Gonzaga.
|
|
06-10-2014 10:33 AM |
|
Lord2FLI
Peanut Vendor
Posts: 4,267
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 448
I Root For: The End
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
Lots of sh*tty ideas in this thread to break something that isn't broke, well done everyone.
|
|
06-10-2014 11:51 AM |
|
The Real LHS81
Special Teams
Posts: 888
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 2
I Root For: SMU
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-10-2014 11:51 AM)Lord2FLI Wrote: Lots of sh*tty ideas in this thread to break something that isn't broke, well done everyone.
Okay! Invite UT-Martin to placate Lord2
|
|
06-10-2014 11:58 AM |
|
HoustonRocks
1st String
Posts: 1,229
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 40
I Root For: HoustonCougars
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
I agree with Lord2FLI statement:
"Lots of sh*tty ideas in this thread to break something that isn't broke, well done everyone"
The ONLY reasons the AAC should expand in the near future are:
1. A network says it will give more money to each team, or
2. BYU agrees to join.
BSU should never be considered after their dealings.
The AAC schools should build instead of looking for outside help.
|
|
06-10-2014 01:13 PM |
|
Lord2FLI
Peanut Vendor
Posts: 4,267
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 448
I Root For: The End
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-10-2014 01:13 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote: I agree with Lord2FLI statement:
"Lots of sh*tty ideas in this thread to break something that isn't broke, well done everyone"
The ONLY reasons the AAC should expand in the near future are:
1. A network says it will give more money to each team, or
2. BYU agrees to join.
BSU should never be considered after their dealings.
The AAC schools should build instead of looking for outside help.
Exactly
|
|
06-10-2014 02:32 PM |
|
Lord2FLI
Peanut Vendor
Posts: 4,267
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 448
I Root For: The End
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-10-2014 11:58 AM)The Real LHS81 Wrote: (06-10-2014 11:51 AM)Lord2FLI Wrote: Lots of sh*tty ideas in this thread to break something that isn't broke, well done everyone.
Okay! Invite UT-Martin to placate Lord2
I'll bite, why would inviting them placate me?
|
|
06-10-2014 02:34 PM |
|
Hotrod
Water Engineer
Posts: 88
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Boise State
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-08-2014 10:48 AM)St. H. Gink Wrote: (06-08-2014 04:47 AM)Hotrod Wrote: (06-06-2014 08:50 AM)billybobby777 Wrote: (06-06-2014 07:19 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote: (06-06-2014 01:10 AM)Hotrod Wrote: Boise did reneg after the Big East changed into a conference that Boise State didn't agree to join. If you could have kept Louisville, Rutgers and the C7, this would be a non issue...
And you owe us $5 million. We will toss a nice party with that money. Our conference is winning bcs games (without running trick plays), winning national championships in both men's and women's basketball, 2 teams in super regionals of baseball. Enjoy the mwc
yes, trick plays is the reason Boise made it big time. They didn't do it "legitimately" by securing an auto bid like UCF.
Well, your, autobid is gone, so we will see who gets it in the future. Looks like the MWC/AAC will have to duke it out. Personally, I look forward to it as it should bring a level of excitement to us lowly "G5's"....
He was being sarcastic.
Ahhh, didn't catch that, My bad... lol
|
|
06-12-2014 01:20 AM |
|
Hotrod
Water Engineer
Posts: 88
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Boise State
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-08-2014 10:51 AM)St. H. Gink Wrote: (06-08-2014 04:54 AM)Hotrod Wrote: (06-07-2014 08:21 PM)St. H. Gink Wrote: (06-07-2014 07:56 AM)Kittonhead Wrote: Boise State's first BCS bowl was won on trick plays.
The second BCS win was based on suffocating defense. Boise has been bringing in Top 50 or 60 recruiting classes for a while and coaching them up. They were physically able to handle BCS teams.
Umm... did you even watch the games?
Game recap from Fiesta Bowl 1: Link
Instant classic: Boise State's trick plays repel OU's miraculous rally
Game recap from Fiesta Bowl 2: Link
Associated Press
GLENDALE, Ariz. -- Boise State pulled "Riddler" out of its bag of tricks.
Presto: the Broncos stunned Texas Christian in a Fiesta Bowl duel of unbeaten BCS busters.
The Statue of Liberty and the Hook and Lateral have been around since at least the 40's. Heck, Oregon ran the Statue twice last year, guess they aren't legit. The Riddler is a fake punt, nothing more. How many times has Bama or any other "power" team ran that? Guess they aren't legit either according to you. 99% of offense in football is deception or "trick plays" in one form or another. Lead with your left when you're going right, that sort of thing....
The response was to an uninformed fan who said Boise didn't use trick plays in their second Fiesta Bowl when they actually did. No one is calling into question BSU's legitimacy in those games. A win is a win.
Damn, caught me again at being inept at telling emotion through the typed postings... Move along, nothing to see here...
|
|
06-12-2014 01:22 AM |
|
Hotrod
Water Engineer
Posts: 88
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Boise State
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-08-2014 06:02 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: either the MWC and AAC need to combine and totally own the G5
or
the AAC and MWC need to form an alliance whereby we play each other in challenges, etc. Heck a defacto MWC champ vs AAC champ as the last regular season "championship game" would be cool in football...hold it in a neutral centralized site in an east meets west deal...i'd go to that
This^^^^^^
|
|
06-12-2014 01:24 AM |
|
Hotrod
Water Engineer
Posts: 88
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Boise State
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-09-2014 07:08 PM)BigHouston Wrote: (06-09-2014 06:48 PM)YNot Wrote: One other thought:
If BYU IS willing to come over to football as a full member, also add Army and you get the following 5-team divisions for football:
EAST
UConn
Cincinnati
Temple
Army
Navy
SOUTH
UCF
USF
ECU
Tulane
Memphis
CENTRAL
Tulsa
Houston
SMU
New Mexico
Air Force
WEST
Boise St.
BYU
UNLV
SDSU
Fresno St.
4 games versus your division and 5 games rotating through the other 15 teams. Play everyone in conference once every 3 years. (Mostly - lock the Army-Navy-Air Force games for the Commander In Chief trophy, so it throws it off a little).
Still add Gonzaga and Wichita St. for basketball. Throw Gonzaga in the West and Wichita St. in the Central. West and Central play 10 games in division and 10 games rotating through the other 16 teams. The East and South play 8 games in division and 12 games rotating through the other 17 teams.
Boise St. blew it, they have no AAC bridge anymore.
Until the AAC needs them of course....
|
|
06-12-2014 01:25 AM |
|
Hotrod
Water Engineer
Posts: 88
Joined: Nov 2013
Reputation: 0
I Root For: Boise State
Location:
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-10-2014 08:37 AM)TripleA Wrote: (06-08-2014 04:41 AM)Hotrod Wrote: (06-06-2014 07:33 AM)TripleA Wrote: What does keeping the C7 have to do with Boise playing football only in the Big East?
It had to do with how much money Boise thought it could make. Period. They offered the same deal to the American and the MWC. We said no. The MWC said yes.
It has a lot to do with it. When the Big East first came calling, part of the deal to lure Boise to an east coast conference, was promising several home and homes with the storied "Big East" B-ball teams... Half the basketball conference leaving changed that. The loss of Louisville and Rutgers, further changed it, and the final nail in the coffin was adding ECU (Fball only at the time), Tulane and Memphis.... In other words, from a Boise State perspective, It isn't "the conference we agreed to join". That was a clause in the agreement as Boise had already been burned by joining the MWC, (immediately after, Utah, BYU and TCU left). AFter that, BSU explored their options. Can't blame a President for trying to choose the best option available. Wouldn't you want your school doing that?
Playing basketball had a lot to do with it? Bull. You had contract agreements to play Memphis and one other team in basketball, so you're wrong about that. Memphis isn't a "storied Big East basketball team," and you guys weren't joining for basketball.
Boise was coming to the Big East BECAUSE THEY COULD MAKE A LOT MORE MONEY. When the projected TV money started dropping like a rock with all the defections, they PROPOSED THE SAME DEAL to both the MWC and the AAC, and took the best offer (the only one, actually).
If you were right, Boise would have turned away from the AAC before offering the same deal to both conferences.
I'm very aware that Memphis isn't a "storied Big East Basketball Team", since they weren't even in the Big East until Boise decided not to join... Part of the lure for Boise to join the Big East at the time was "certain Amount" of home and homes in Basketball since they weren't joining for that. A big lure at the time as the Big East was HUGE in Basketball. It was then that Boise realized the Big East was going downhill, the MWC made an offer and Boise approached the Big East with the same offer (who said no) and Boise stayed MWC... So, you are wrong about that....
|
|
06-12-2014 01:35 AM |
|
TripleA
Legend
Posts: 58,463
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 3153
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location: The woods of Bammer
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
(06-12-2014 01:35 AM)Hotrod Wrote: (06-10-2014 08:37 AM)TripleA Wrote: (06-08-2014 04:41 AM)Hotrod Wrote: (06-06-2014 07:33 AM)TripleA Wrote: What does keeping the C7 have to do with Boise playing football only in the Big East?
It had to do with how much money Boise thought it could make. Period. They offered the same deal to the American and the MWC. We said no. The MWC said yes.
It has a lot to do with it. When the Big East first came calling, part of the deal to lure Boise to an east coast conference, was promising several home and homes with the storied "Big East" B-ball teams... Half the basketball conference leaving changed that. The loss of Louisville and Rutgers, further changed it, and the final nail in the coffin was adding ECU (Fball only at the time), Tulane and Memphis.... In other words, from a Boise State perspective, It isn't "the conference we agreed to join". That was a clause in the agreement as Boise had already been burned by joining the MWC, (immediately after, Utah, BYU and TCU left). AFter that, BSU explored their options. Can't blame a President for trying to choose the best option available. Wouldn't you want your school doing that?
Playing basketball had a lot to do with it? Bull. You had contract agreements to play Memphis and one other team in basketball, so you're wrong about that. Memphis isn't a "storied Big East basketball team," and you guys weren't joining for basketball.
Boise was coming to the Big East BECAUSE THEY COULD MAKE A LOT MORE MONEY. When the projected TV money started dropping like a rock with all the defections, they PROPOSED THE SAME DEAL to both the MWC and the AAC, and took the best offer (the only one, actually).
If you were right, Boise would have turned away from the AAC before offering the same deal to both conferences.
I'm very aware that Memphis isn't a "storied Big East Basketball Team", since they weren't even in the Big East until Boise decided not to join... Part of the lure for Boise to join the Big East at the time was "certain Amount" of home and homes in Basketball since they weren't joining for that. A big lure at the time as the Big East was HUGE in Basketball. It was then that Boise realized the Big East was going downhill, the MWC made an offer and Boise approached the Big East with the same offer (who said no) and Boise stayed MWC... So, you are wrong about that....
It is impossible to debate people with set opinions and reading comprehension issues, who argue in the face of facts. I refuse to make any further attempt.
|
|
06-12-2014 01:42 AM |
|
Bearcats#1
Ad nauseam King
Posts: 45,310
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 1224
I Root For: Pony94
Location: In your head.
|
RE: Scheduling Alliance between the AAC and MW?
you people who say no to Boise just because Boise made a sweetheart deal with the MWC need to get over yourselves....they didn't do anything YOUR school wouldn't have done facing the same situation. In case you haven't figured it out, schools don't care about each other, they, by in large, make moves that are the best or at least perceived best for THEIR OWN school. Each schools AD is paid to make his/her OWN school successful, they are not paid to care about any other school unless caring about any other school helps his/her own school in some way/shape/form.
|
|
06-12-2014 07:27 AM |
|