(06-27-2014 02:48 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 12:42 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 12:40 PM)CurveItAround Wrote:  Worst idea ever.

Why?

A 24 team conference? You'd have to wait for championship game deregulation so you could have a 4 team (1 for each 6 team division) playoff.

Or you could play 9 conference games with each team have 2 permanent partners with 7 games to rotate around the remaining 21 schools. But then you'd have vastly different strength of schedules.

I think it would be a good idea for the MWC, as they could get back into Texas. I'm not sure what the AAC gets out of it other than the chance to play Boise.

Too many teams and too much distance between teams to make this workable.

Actually, my plan would call for a single championship game matching the highest ranked team in each of two 12 team divisions. And, yes, that would require a change to the current rules. I have little doubt that is going to happen within a matter of months.

Is this unconventional? Yep. But it solves the travel problem. I wouldn't have any regular season conference games between the two divisions (which would be the two current conferences). Division schedules could be determined pretty much the way they are now, or they could be modified if it suits the members of the division.

Essentially, the "merger" does only three things. First, it increases the leverage the 24 schools have in media negotiations. Second, it replaces two meaningless and financially marginal CCG's with a single, more attractive championship game pitting the highest ranked team from each division with the winner getting the inside track to an access bowl. And third, it allows AAC basketball to avoid dilution of its tournament revenues.

I would envision this conference making a commitment to much stronger schedules. With an 8 game conference schedule, I think they should try to have their best teams schedule two games a year against P5 opponents and a third against independent BYU. The ultimate goal here, IMO, is to position the conference for an AQ spot in an expanded 8 team playoff. That's not going to happen without a serious SOS upgrade.

In short, it would not be my intention to have schools that can't afford sending their teams back and forth from coast to coast. Even if they could afford it, their fans wouldn't care for it. This merger would be a way to boost conference revenues through leverage and scale and to magnify the credibility of its champion. If there were no assurance from network partners that this would be the result, it doesn't happen (and neither does any poaching).

(06-27-2014 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:38 PM)Maize Wrote:  Merger without the Fat:

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Fresno State
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

That's only a merger in the sense that the ACC poaching Miami, Va Tech, and BC was a merger.

Basically, you are saying the 11 members of the AAC should vote to expel Tulsa in order to make this happen. Maybe you can get the votes to do that. Obviously, Tulsa won't vote with you, and I suspect Navy wouldn't either, as a matter of honor. If I'm Temple or Tulane, I'm afraid some day you'll consider me more "fat" to be cut out, so I'd vote against expulsion. ECU might feel the same way, after the hard time they had finding a conference home.

On the other side, I doubt Air Force would join you, and there's nothing in this for BYU that they either don't have now, or willingly walked away from before.

I think it's a nice fantasy league, but it's just a fantasy.

Im a little more accepting of the "fat" on the AAC side simply because they seem to be investing in infrastructure (Tulane) or have performed well on the field in the past (Tulsa in most sports and Temple in basketball). For that reason I would use the AAC as the core structure to build with. I think the best realistic senario is waiting until the rules governing divisional play are deregulated (which will probably happen very soon).

In that landscape, I would look at a 3-division 18 team all-sports AAC.

East-

UConn
Temple
ECU
Cinci
USF
UCF


Central

Houston
Tulane
SMU
Tulsa
Navy
Memphis


West

Boise
Fresno
SDSU
New Mexico
UNLV
BYU (or Air Force, Colorado St, pick one)


Play everyone from your division and rotate through the other divisions at a rate of 3 a year (still an 8 game schedule). Basketball, you play everyone once (17 games). Non revenue sports would be largely limited to divisional play. That conference will dominate the G5 automatic BCS bid and it will be a powerful basketball conference. Expenses wouldn't be that much worse than they currently are. Such a dominant conference is likely to be a solid TV property with lots of markets and most of the best known names in the G5.

(06-27-2014 12:23 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 12:14 PM)ken d Wrote:  Make no mistake. This combined entity would still not be a contender to become a P6 conference.

In that case, there is no compelling reason to do it.

lol. Exactly. What a marroon.

why do people insist over and over that two products that are not commanding large TV dollars on their own (the AAC doing better than most) will somehow command a large jump in TV money when combined

the matchups overall are still just as non-compelling as before

and why do people insist these large conferences playing a ton of conference games against each other and getting a "win" over marginal programs mostly and handing losses to those same marginal programs pushing them further towards being marginal somehow makes a "strong" conference

there is only one way for a conference not in the "P5" and really for those in the "P5" to gain strength and that is to beat up on OTHER CONFERENCES PERIOD

"hey we are all 5-7 to 7-5, but man we played each other tough" does not make a quality conference that anyone cares about

you would be MUCH better off with a conference where the vast majority of fewer teams beat up on other conferences to the tune of 5-0 or 4-1 before they went to conference and started to play each other

the reverse will never be the case ever

(06-27-2014 04:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:38 PM)Maize Wrote:  Merger without the Fat:

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Fresno State
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

That's only a merger in the sense that the ACC poaching Miami, Va Tech, and BC was a merger.

Basically, you are saying the 11 members of the AAC should vote to expel Tulsa in order to make this happen. Maybe you can get the votes to do that. Obviously, Tulsa won't vote with you, and I suspect Navy wouldn't either, as a matter of honor. If I'm Temple or Tulane, I'm afraid some day you'll consider me more "fat" to be cut out, so I'd vote against expulsion. ECU might feel the same way, after the hard time they had finding a conference home.

On the other side, I doubt Air Force would join you, and there's nothing in this for BYU that they either don't have now, or willingly walked away from before.

I think it's a nice fantasy league, but it's just a fantasy.

Im a little more accepting of the "fat" on the AAC side simply because they seem to be investing in infrastructure (Tulane) or have performed well on the field in the past (Tulsa in most sports and Temple in basketball). For that reason I would use the AAC as the core structure to build with. I think the best realistic senario is waiting until the rules governing divisional play are deregulated (which will probably happen very soon).

In that landscape, I would look at a 3-division 18 team all-sports AAC.

East-

UConn
Temple
ECU
Cinci
USF
UCF


Central

Houston
Tulane
SMU
Tulsa
Navy
Memphis


West

Boise
Fresno
SDSU
New Mexico
UNLV
BYU (or Air Force, Colorado St, pick one)


Play everyone from your division and rotate through the other divisions at a rate of 3 a year (still an 8 game schedule). Basketball, you play everyone once (17 games). Non revenue sports would be largely limited to divisional play. That conference will dominate the G5 automatic BCS bid and it will be a powerful basketball conference. Expenses wouldn't be that much worse than they currently are. Such a dominant conference is likely to be a solid TV property with lots of markets and most of the best known names in the G5.

Why does BYU want to do this? They went independent to avoid this. I think they might give up indy status for a P5 invite, but not to be a cog in a G5 conference.

And Boise and SDSU had previously agreed to join the Big East for the sole purpose of getting into a BCS AQ conference. When that disappeared, they couldn't get out fast enough. This new version called the AAC still doesn't have an AQ to offer. They are basically the same schools the MWC considered a merger with when they were in C-USA.

Without those schools, there's no point in doing anything.

(06-27-2014 04:23 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 04:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:38 PM)Maize Wrote:  Merger without the Fat:

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Fresno State
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

That's only a merger in the sense that the ACC poaching Miami, Va Tech, and BC was a merger.

Basically, you are saying the 11 members of the AAC should vote to expel Tulsa in order to make this happen. Maybe you can get the votes to do that. Obviously, Tulsa won't vote with you, and I suspect Navy wouldn't either, as a matter of honor. If I'm Temple or Tulane, I'm afraid some day you'll consider me more "fat" to be cut out, so I'd vote against expulsion. ECU might feel the same way, after the hard time they had finding a conference home.

On the other side, I doubt Air Force would join you, and there's nothing in this for BYU that they either don't have now, or willingly walked away from before.

I think it's a nice fantasy league, but it's just a fantasy.

Im a little more accepting of the "fat" on the AAC side simply because they seem to be investing in infrastructure (Tulane) or have performed well on the field in the past (Tulsa in most sports and Temple in basketball). For that reason I would use the AAC as the core structure to build with. I think the best realistic senario is waiting until the rules governing divisional play are deregulated (which will probably happen very soon).

In that landscape, I would look at a 3-division 18 team all-sports AAC.

East-

UConn
Temple
ECU
Cinci
USF
UCF


Central

Houston
Tulane
SMU
Tulsa
Navy
Memphis


West

Boise
Fresno
SDSU
New Mexico
UNLV
BYU (or Air Force, Colorado St, pick one)


Play everyone from your division and rotate through the other divisions at a rate of 3 a year (still an 8 game schedule). Basketball, you play everyone once (17 games). Non revenue sports would be largely limited to divisional play. That conference will dominate the G5 automatic BCS bid and it will be a powerful basketball conference. Expenses wouldn't be that much worse than they currently are. Such a dominant conference is likely to be a solid TV property with lots of markets and most of the best known names in the G5.

Why does BYU want to do this? They went independent to avoid this. I think they might give up indy status for a P5 invite, but not to be a cog in a G5 conference.

And Boise and SDSU had previously agreed to join the Big East for the sole purpose of getting into a BCS AQ conference. When that disappeared, they couldn't get out fast enough. This new version called the AAC still doesn't have an AQ to offer. They are basically the same schools the MWC considered a merger with when they were in C-USA.

Without those schools, there's no point in doing anything.

BYU may not want to join (which is why alternate choices were provided). With the top 6 teams in the west, I see know reason why Boise and SDSU wouldn't join. Do some research. The reason Boose backed out was because there wasn't going to be a viable western division and because the Big West option for thier Olympic sports was unattractive and expensive. The schools being left behind likely LOWER the possible payout per team.

Why would it be more valuable--simple. It's a national conference. This model would make a G5 game in Philly relevant to a viewer in Fresno---and vice versa. National sports channels are broadcasting the same game in Phillie as in Fresno---now you have a product with an appeal that is not so regional. It can attract some viewers EVERYWHERE. If you broadcast nationally, a national conference is a perfect fit.

(06-27-2014 04:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 04:23 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 04:08 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:40 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:38 PM)Maize Wrote:  Merger without the Fat:

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Fresno State
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

That's only a merger in the sense that the ACC poaching Miami, Va Tech, and BC was a merger.

Basically, you are saying the 11 members of the AAC should vote to expel Tulsa in order to make this happen. Maybe you can get the votes to do that. Obviously, Tulsa won't vote with you, and I suspect Navy wouldn't either, as a matter of honor. If I'm Temple or Tulane, I'm afraid some day you'll consider me more "fat" to be cut out, so I'd vote against expulsion. ECU might feel the same way, after the hard time they had finding a conference home.

On the other side, I doubt Air Force would join you, and there's nothing in this for BYU that they either don't have now, or willingly walked away from before.

I think it's a nice fantasy league, but it's just a fantasy.

Im a little more accepting of the "fat" on the AAC side simply because they seem to be investing in infrastructure (Tulane) or have performed well on the field in the past (Tulsa in most sports and Temple in basketball). For that reason I would use the AAC as the core structure to build with. I think the best realistic senario is waiting until the rules governing divisional play are deregulated (which will probably happen very soon).

In that landscape, I would look at a 3-division 18 team all-sports AAC.

East-

UConn
Temple
ECU
Cinci
USF
UCF


Central

Houston
Tulane
SMU
Tulsa
Navy
Memphis


West

Boise
Fresno
SDSU
New Mexico
UNLV
BYU (or Air Force, Colorado St, pick one)


Play everyone from your division and rotate through the other divisions at a rate of 3 a year (still an 8 game schedule). Basketball, you play everyone once (17 games). Non revenue sports would be largely limited to divisional play. That conference will dominate the G5 automatic BCS bid and it will be a powerful basketball conference. Expenses wouldn't be that much worse than they currently are. Such a dominant conference is likely to be a solid TV property with lots of markets and most of the best known names in the G5.

Why does BYU want to do this? They went independent to avoid this. I think they might give up indy status for a P5 invite, but not to be a cog in a G5 conference.

And Boise and SDSU had previously agreed to join the Big East for the sole purpose of getting into a BCS AQ conference. When that disappeared, they couldn't get out fast enough. This new version called the AAC still doesn't have an AQ to offer. They are basically the same schools the MWC considered a merger with when they were in C-USA.

Without those schools, there's no point in doing anything.

BYU may not want to join (which is why alternate choices were provided). With the top 6 teams in the west, I see know reason why Boise and SDSU wouldn't join. Do some research. The reason Boose backed out was because there wasn't going to be a viable western division and because the Big West option for thier Olympic sports was unattractive and expensive. The schools being left behind likely LOWER the possible payout per team.

Why would it be more valuable--simple. It's a national conference. This model would make a G5 game in Philly relevant to a viewer in Fresno---and vice versa. National sports channels are broadcasting the same game in Phillie as in Fresno---now you have a product with an appeal that is not so regional. It can attract some viewers EVERYWHERE. If you broadcast nationally, a national conference is a perfect fit.

I 100% agree with you on the concept of with a more spread out arrangement it has more broad appeal......as you stated Fresno caring what happens in an east coast match up and east coast teams caring what happens in a west coast match up

in the arrangement listed I would go further and ditch Temple from the first group......pick one from the middle group and then New Mexico from the final group

then you would play 4 games in your division and I would have it where you played 2 games from one division and 1 game from the the other and then swap that every two years

then you are playing 7 conference games and 5 OOC

and even if some thought that was too complicated if you played 4-2-2 that is still 8 conference games and 4 OOC and I believe that 4 OOC is the minimum that a non-P5 conference should play

the problem of course is that some will never get past the concept that you first stated and that is giving appeal to a west coast game to the east coast and vice versa

the underlying sentiment on these forums and elsewhere is to get as many teams as possible in the smallest area possible and then pretend those outside of that area have any reason to care especially if they play 9 conference games and all beat each other up

(06-27-2014 01:53 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:43 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:32 PM)Carolina Stang Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:20 PM)lance99 Wrote:  AAC fan boys need to stop with this. The MWC seems to have no interest in this. Just accept that you C-USA leftovers are a G5 conference and move on.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Akron has spoken. Lol.

What a maroon.

Really?

I want to see your conference stand on your own(without the Big East bus pass). If yor are the same place 5 years from now, i got your back.

Just looking at some of the threads, you guys think that you are way better then everybody else and you only concerns are markets.Thats fact.

The reality is you are no better than the MAC starting this year. Live with it!

That is really a dumb statement especially when you count the overall athletics of the AAC...Last I checked that Conference still has the Men's and Women National Champion in Basketball and they have the Fiesta Bowl Champion with as many as 3 schools likely to be Preseason Top 30 in Football in Cincinnati, Houston and UCF with a much better TV Deal with ESPN....

Last I checked, the OP was discussing football only. And with that as the basis, his statement is pretty valid.

Now if the AAC were to stop sponsoring football, a perfectly reasonable thing t do for 75% of the conference, the you might have a point.

It is too big and too spread out. UC has played SDSU, Fresno, Oregon State, recently and BYU coming up so an
occasional mountain or west coast ooc game is fine. For conference games it is much more preferable to play eastern time zone or
2 games central (Tulsa, Houston, etc).

Garbage.

(06-27-2014 02:18 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:14 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:09 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:38 PM)Maize Wrote:  Merger without the Fat:

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Fresno State
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

I like this trim the fat conference better

East
UConn, Cincy, UCF, USF, Memphis, Navy FB

West
BYU, New Mexico, Houston, SMU, Col. ST., AFA FB

The east division NEEDS East Carolina football - it would be foolish to leave them out since their attendance is greater than all the other schools in your east.

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
East Carolina
UConn
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Navy
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

Yes...ECU and Tulane would be just right....

Any football related list that includes Uvonn, Temple, Tulane, Memphis, Tulsa, or SMU as 'must haves' is counterfeit. They either can't draw flies or are not competitive, or both. Same goes for over half of the MWC, or any G5 school. It's not hard to see who has consistently won AND drawn a crowd.

(06-27-2014 02:24 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  No one in the AAC wants to align with the MWC. We just don't. There's no reason to align together. And to the Akron zip fan who thinks that the AAC is equal to the Mac, you're either trolling to an incomprehensible level or you've lost all touch with reality.

No trolling from me. Just stating the obvious. Yes I know you had a NC in Basketball. And yes I know you went to the Fesita Bowl, but lets be honest with that one, you got there only because everyone in front of you lost(with your fans trashing the MAC along the way).

(06-27-2014 04:09 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 12:23 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 12:14 PM)ken d Wrote:  Make no mistake. This combined entity would still not be a contender to become a P6 conference.

In that case, there is no compelling reason to do it.

lol. Exactly. What a marroon.

If the only reason to expand is to become a P6 conference, then there is no reason for the AAC to ever consider expanding. There is nothing they can do, now or in the future, that would make them worthy of P6 status, unless somehow they can convince at least two schools of the stature of a Florida State or Oklahoma to join them. They can not improve by adding more G5 schools.

(06-27-2014 05:30 PM)CurveItAround Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:18 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:14 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:09 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:38 PM)Maize Wrote:  Merger without the Fat:

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Fresno State
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

I like this trim the fat conference better

East
UConn, Cincy, UCF, USF, Memphis, Navy FB

West
BYU, New Mexico, Houston, SMU, Col. ST., AFA FB

The east division NEEDS East Carolina football - it would be foolish to leave them out since their attendance is greater than all the other schools in your east.

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
East Carolina
UConn
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Navy
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

Yes...ECU and Tulane would be just right....

Any football related list that includes Uvonn, Temple, Tulane, Memphis, Tulsa, or SMU as 'must haves' is counterfeit. They either can't draw flies or are not competitive, or both. Same goes for over half of the MWC, or any G5 school. It's not hard to see who has consistently won AND drawn a crowd.

It more than just "Football"...UConn through Basketball is a National Brand and the National Champions....Memphis, Cincinnati and Temple are Basketball Powers with SMU a likely Top 10 Basketball team next year under Larry Brown...Tulane is in a Large Market and a AAU Member...that is where IMO they can make money...

(06-27-2014 05:30 PM)CurveItAround Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:18 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:14 PM)lumberpack4 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:09 PM)goofus Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 01:38 PM)Maize Wrote:  Merger without the Fat:

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
UConn
East Carolina
Navy
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Boise State
Fresno State
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

I like this trim the fat conference better

East
UConn, Cincy, UCF, USF, Memphis, Navy FB

West
BYU, New Mexico, Houston, SMU, Col. ST., AFA FB

The east division NEEDS East Carolina football - it would be foolish to leave them out since their attendance is greater than all the other schools in your east.

American Division
South Florida
Central Florida
Cincinnati
East Carolina
UConn
Memphis
Temple

Mountain Division
Tulane
Houston
SMU
Navy
Air Force
BYU
San Diego State

Yes...ECU and Tulane would be just right....

Any football related list that includes Uvonn, Temple, Tulane, Memphis, Tulsa, or SMU as 'must haves' is counterfeit. They either can't draw flies or are not competitive, or both. Same goes for over half of the MWC, or any G5 school. It's not hard to see who has consistently won AND drawn a crowd.

Uh OK...And North Texas does not even sniff or come close to your "counterfeits".

(06-27-2014 05:48 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:24 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  No one in the AAC wants to align with the MWC. We just don't. There's no reason to align together. And to the Akron zip fan who thinks that the AAC is equal to the Mac, you're either trolling to an incomprehensible level or you've lost all touch with reality.

No trolling from me. Just stating the obvious. Yes I know you had a NC in Basketball. And yes I know you went to the Fesita Bowl, but lets be honest with that one, you got there only because everyone in front of you lost(with your fans trashing the MAC along the way).

Zip fu ck, you are stupid. UConn was a7 seed. They beat a 2, 3, 4, and 1 seed in the tourney.
The MAC sucks so bad it is not funny.

(06-27-2014 09:41 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 05:48 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:24 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  No one in the AAC wants to align with the MWC. We just don't. There's no reason to align together. And to the Akron zip fan who thinks that the AAC is equal to the Mac, you're either trolling to an incomprehensible level or you've lost all touch with reality.

No trolling from me. Just stating the obvious. Yes I know you had a NC in Basketball. And yes I know you went to the Fesita Bowl, but lets be honest with that one, you got there only because everyone in front of you lost(with your fans trashing the MAC along the way).

Zip fu ck, you are stupid. UConn was a7 seed. They beat a 2, 3, 4, and 1 seed in the tourney.
The MAC sucks so bad it is not funny.

Yeah....UConn beat the #1 Overall Seed in the NCAA Tournament and the Preseason #1 Team for the Title while beating the B1G Tournament Champion-(Michigan State) in the Elite Eight...just amazing attempt to try to belittle what they did....

(06-27-2014 09:41 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 05:48 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:24 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  No one in the AAC wants to align with the MWC. We just don't. There's no reason to align together. And to the Akron zip fan who thinks that the AAC is equal to the Mac, you're either trolling to an incomprehensible level or you've lost all touch with reality.

No trolling from me. Just stating the obvious. Yes I know you had a NC in Basketball. And yes I know you went to the Fesita Bowl, but lets be honest with that one, you got there only because everyone in front of you lost(with your fans trashing the MAC along the way).

Zip fu ck, you are stupid. UConn was a7 seed. They beat a 2, 3, 4, and 1 seed in the tourney.
The MAC sucks so bad it is not funny.

Aside from Ohio. Averaging 8.4 wins in FB the last 5 years and 23.8 in BB the last 5 years. Leading the MAC in FB/BB attendance at the same time. Planning massive additions to the football stadium and basketball arena.

Other MAC schools have a mix of strengths and weaknesses. Ohio is sucking it up in baseball right now pissing away a storied tradition that includes 15 MAC baseball titles and 131 guys drafted.

(06-27-2014 09:53 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 09:41 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 05:48 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:24 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  No one in the AAC wants to align with the MWC. We just don't. There's no reason to align together. And to the Akron zip fan who thinks that the AAC is equal to the Mac, you're either trolling to an incomprehensible level or you've lost all touch with reality.

No trolling from me. Just stating the obvious. Yes I know you had a NC in Basketball. And yes I know you went to the Fesita Bowl, but lets be honest with that one, you got there only because everyone in front of you lost(with your fans trashing the MAC along the way).

Zip fu ck, you are stupid. UConn was a7 seed. They beat a 2, 3, 4, and 1 seed in the tourney.
The MAC sucks so bad it is not funny.

Yeah....UConn beat the #1 Overall Seed in the NCAA Tournament and the Preseason #1 Team for the Title while beating the B1G Tournament Champion-(Michigan State) in the Elite Eight...just amazing attempt to try to belittle what they did....

SMU should have been in the dance.

(06-27-2014 09:59 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 09:53 PM)Maize Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 09:41 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 05:48 PM)lance99 Wrote:  

(06-27-2014 02:24 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  No one in the AAC wants to align with the MWC. We just don't. There's no reason to align together. And to the Akron zip fan who thinks that the AAC is equal to the Mac, you're either trolling to an incomprehensible level or you've lost all touch with reality.

No trolling from me. Just stating the obvious. Yes I know you had a NC in Basketball. And yes I know you went to the Fesita Bowl, but lets be honest with that one, you got there only because everyone in front of you lost(with your fans trashing the MAC along the way).

Zip fu ck, you are stupid. UConn was a7 seed. They beat a 2, 3, 4, and 1 seed in the tourney.
The MAC sucks so bad it is not funny.

Yeah....UConn beat the #1 Overall Seed in the NCAA Tournament and the Preseason #1 Team for the Title while beating the B1G Tournament Champion-(Michigan State) in the Elite Eight...just amazing attempt to try to belittle what they did....

SMU should have been in the dance.

Nope, NIT was good for us