(10-04-2015 11:42 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 11:02 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:51 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:38 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 09:34 AM)CornellCoog Wrote:  I'd rather get rid of a few teams than add any more dead weight.

There really isn't dead weight in the conference...just teams in down cycles.

The American might be a little weaker than Big East 2.0 but it's consistently solid and has strong basketball.

Tulane is in one heck of a down cycle then.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

that's what I was thinking. I just don't get the Tulane and SMU love on this board. Those 2 schools (and Tulsa) will never have a season where they average even 20k per game. (Actual fans at the game) I know SMU and Tulane are notoriously dishonest at counting fans. I know for a fact that each played a home game in the past 2 seasons with less than 5,000 fans at the game. Big markets, good schools does not equal fan support or success in college football. Even when Tulsa was on a roll and wining big games like at Notre Dame on NBC, no one in Oklahoma even noticed. I lived there during that period. Having lived in big cities like Dallas and Houston and others I can tell you which schools simply cannot ever get the markets fan support/interest. We've got to quit swimming up stream in our thinking that a school in a big city equals potential. It does not .cheers!

The thing is city schools have a MASSIVE potential. ECU fans love to brag about attendance (rightfully so), but what many don't know is that's a fairly recent development. In 2002, ECU was a typical G5 with attendance of 29K. In fact, the attendance rose slightly from there, but remained good---but hardly spectacular, for several more years---

2003-33K
2004-30K
2005-33K

It was 2006 when the real step up occurred.

2006-37K
2008-41K
2009-42K
2010-41K
2011-59K
2012-50K
2013-43K
2014-44K

The difference wasn't added capacity (the stadium had a capacity of 43K starting in the mid-1990's). In 2006 the team was ok---but not great (7-6, and just 5-6 the prior year). So, the question is---what happened in 2006 that got things really rolling at ECU? Whataever it was---maybe the rest of us should use that info and figure out how to adapt it to our specific situations. BillyBobobby---Any insights to what they did there to get the attendance to explode in 2006?

WTF.

In what world is 33k bad when you win 3 games in 2 years. Houston in a city of millions with 40k students can't even do that a decade plus later. You drew 24k a couple years ago. We drew more than that in 1978 for perspective.

In 2002 we had a 4 win team and a Friday night rainy 20 degree game with nothing to play for in late November we had 18k fans to that completely skewed that crap. How many years was it before that that we didn't have over 30k fans. Probably the late 80's.

You can't talk anything about our attendance when you are Houston.

(10-04-2015 08:50 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 11:42 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 11:02 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:51 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:38 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  There really isn't dead weight in the conference...just teams in down cycles.

The American might be a little weaker than Big East 2.0 but it's consistently solid and has strong basketball.

Tulane is in one heck of a down cycle then.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

that's what I was thinking. I just don't get the Tulane and SMU love on this board. Those 2 schools (and Tulsa) will never have a season where they average even 20k per game. (Actual fans at the game) I know SMU and Tulane are notoriously dishonest at counting fans. I know for a fact that each played a home game in the past 2 seasons with less than 5,000 fans at the game. Big markets, good schools does not equal fan support or success in college football. Even when Tulsa was on a roll and wining big games like at Notre Dame on NBC, no one in Oklahoma even noticed. I lived there during that period. Having lived in big cities like Dallas and Houston and others I can tell you which schools simply cannot ever get the markets fan support/interest. We've got to quit swimming up stream in our thinking that a school in a big city equals potential. It does not .cheers!

The thing is city schools have a MASSIVE potential. ECU fans love to brag about attendance (rightfully so), but what many don't know is that's a fairly recent development. In 2002, ECU was a typical G5 with attendance of 29K. In fact, the attendance rose slightly from there, but remained good---but hardly spectacular, for several more years---

2003-33K
2004-30K
2005-33K

It was 2006 when the real step up occurred.

2006-37K
2008-41K
2009-42K
2010-41K
2011-59K
2012-50K
2013-43K
2014-44K

The difference wasn't added capacity (the stadium had a capacity of 43K starting in the mid-1990's). In 2006 the team was ok---but not great (7-6, and just 5-6 the prior year). So, the question is---what happened in 2006 that got things really rolling at ECU? Whataever it was---maybe the rest of us should use that info and figure out how to adapt it to our specific situations. BillyBobobby---Any insights to what they did there to get the attendance to explode in 2006?

WTF.

In what world is 33k bad when you win 3 games in 2 years. Houston in a city of millions with 40k students can't even do that a decade plus later. You drew 24k a couple years ago. We drew more than that in 1978 for perspective.

In 2002 we had a 4 win team and a Friday night rainy 20 degree game with nothing to play for in late November we had 18k fans to that completely skewed that crap. How many years was it before that that we didn't have over 30k fans. Probably the late 80's.

You can't talk anything about our attendance when you are Houston.

Reading comprehension is your friend. Where exactly did I say anything about ECU's attendance being "bad"?

Nowhere does it say its attendance is bad. In fact---I said just the opposite---I said attendance was "good" (4th sentence of the first paragraph). The worst thing the post said was the ECU attendance "was typical of most G5s as recently as 2002"--then I describe how it began to rise in the following years and how it really took off in 2006.

The post is simply asking how ECU accomplished its hockey stick rise in attendance. It was actually brought up in a positive post on another site. The jist of that post was that the Houston numbers are now kinda similar to where ECU was 10 years ago---It asked the question----could we see a climb like ECU did? Listening to Billybobby blast the city schools made me curious as to what triggered ECU's climb.

(10-04-2015 06:18 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 11:07 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 11:02 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:51 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 10:38 AM)rjglassett Wrote:  There really isn't dead weight in the conference...just teams in down cycles.

The American might be a little weaker than Big East 2.0 but it's consistently solid and has strong basketball.

Tulane is in one heck of a down cycle then.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

that's what I was thinking. I just don't get the Tulane and SMU love on this board. Those 2 schools (and Tulsa) will never have a season where they average even 20k per game. (Actual fans at the game) I know SMU and Tulane are notoriously dishonest at counting fans. I know for a fact that each played a home game in the past 2 seasons with less than 5,000 fans at the game. Big markets, good schools does not equal fan support or success in college football. Even when Tulsa was on a roll and wining big games like at Notre Dame on NBC, no one in Oklahoma even noticed. I lived there during that period. Having lived in big cities like Dallas and Houston and others I can tell you which schools simply cannot ever get the markets fan support/interest. We've got to quit swimming up stream in our thinking that a school in a big city equals potential. It does not .cheers!

Those three are highly regarded academic schools with names the casual fan has heard of. They are here because they add to the league recognition and also fit Navy. Its no surprise Navy chose to be in the West and it wasn't because of Houston or Memphis.

Lmao. Navy wanted a couple of easy wins. Toolame and SMOO provide that.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Why do you have all of the hate going on for SMU and Tulane? I like them in the AAC.

How bout not go after anyone and become a great conference by beating people in other conferences.

We need to add CSU or Air Force to the East division so that the Civil COnFLiCT can be a 3-way rivalry. It only makes sense.

(10-04-2015 08:43 PM)DeeHee33 Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 08:35 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 06:38 AM)DeeHee33 Wrote:  Getting Air Force and Colorado State in the AAC .. Then letting Big 12 expand with Boise State and Byu. Now this weakens the MWC conference and now the AAC is in position to become the 6 power conference ?

CSU is not spending $220M on a football stadium to move laterally...

Sometimes you have to move sideways before you get a chance to move up ...

This. See TCU.

(10-04-2015 09:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Reading comprehension is your friend. Where exactly did I say anything about ECU's attendance being "bad"?

Nowhere does it say its attendance is bad. In fact---I said just the opposite---I said attendance was "good" (4th sentence of the first paragraph). The worst thing the post said was the ECU attendance "was typical of most G5s as recently as 2002"--then I describe how it began to rise in the following years and how it really took off in 2006.

The post is simply asking how ECU accomplished its hockey stick rise in attendance. It was actually brought up in a positive post on another site. The jist of that post was that the Houston numbers are now kinda similar to where ECU was 10 years ago---It asked the question----could we see a climb like ECU did? Listening to Billybobby blast the city schools made me curious as to what triggered ECU's climb.

You still aren't even doing 30k and were just at 24 to 27k the last two years. 2002 was an outliner brought about by bad weather and a late night Friday game the entire high school football association protested and called for fans to boycott the game and the lowest drawing game in probably 30 years. We still drew 29k for the year with a 4 win team.

We had averaged 37-42k the 3 years prior to that after the stadium expansion. Not only did we typically have some of the best G5 attendance we had some of the highest priced tickets and ticket revenue as far back as the early 2000's when I first became aware of that stuff. Even when we were winning 7 games in 3 years we still averaged over 31k or something like that which shows the complete baseline our fanbase has even in the roughest of times without 40k students and in a city of millions.

(10-04-2015 10:15 PM)Rasta Wrote:  How bout not go after anyone and become a great conference by beating people in other conferences.

That's fine---but lets be honest. We know that we will lose some teams to a power conference at some point. Best to build the conference now when in a postion of strength rather than later, when we are weaker. For instance---we can easily attract a couple of good basketball schools right now (say Wichita and maybe VCU). But if UConn and Cinci get poached---that will be harder to do. So---better to do it now than be caught with our pants down later. It was a lesson that the Big East never really learned.

We need to raid the mwc of enough teams were they can't hold a championship game. Then that Boise contract becomes a noose around their neck.

(10-04-2015 10:40 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 09:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Reading comprehension is your friend. Where exactly did I say anything about ECU's attendance being "bad"?

Nowhere does it say its attendance is bad. In fact---I said just the opposite---I said attendance was "good" (4th sentence of the first paragraph). The worst thing the post said was the ECU attendance "was typical of most G5s as recently as 2002"--then I describe how it began to rise in the following years and how it really took off in 2006.

The post is simply asking how ECU accomplished its hockey stick rise in attendance. It was actually brought up in a positive post on another site. The jist of that post was that the Houston numbers are now kinda similar to where ECU was 10 years ago---It asked the question----could we see a climb like ECU did? Listening to Billybobby blast the city schools made me curious as to what triggered ECU's climb.

You still aren't even doing 30k and were just at 24 to 27k the last two years. 2002 was an outliner brought about by bad weather and a late night Friday game the entire high school football association protested and called for fans to boycott the game and the lowest drawing game in probably 30 years. We still drew 29k for the year with a 4 win team.

We had averaged 37-42k the 3 years prior to that after the stadium expansion. Not only did we typically have some of the best G5 attendance we had some of the highest priced tickets and ticket revenue as far back as the early 2000's when I first became aware of that stuff. Even when we were winning 7 games in 3 years we still averaged over 31k or something like that which shows the complete baseline our fanbase has even in the roughest of times without 40k students and in a city of millions.

lol.....Whats with the anger--and who are you arguing with? Honestly, set down the beer and sleep it off. Nobody cares why 2002 ECU attendance was 29K. It was just noted as the low from which the attendance grew to 50K. Get your head out of yopur azz and learn to read. Im not attacking ECU attendance. If anything, Im envious of it and would like to replicate it you putz.

And bye the way---The last 2 years OUR attendance was under odd circumstances. 2013 we were nomads without a on campus stadium. Last year the fans were ready to be done with Levine and protested by not showing up after the embarrassing loses.

Adding CSU or Air Force moves the needle very little.If the Big 12 gets its championship game, no one from the American is leaving.


To that end, the only thing that boosts this conference is if BYU and Boise are added (all sports). This will only happen at the end of our current contract if ESPN decides that it can afford $8 million per year per team for 14 American teams. That is a lot of coin. The TV ratings for that collection of 14 would have to be really good to justify that, and then there might be a P-6 conversation. Would be a conference covering 3 time zones.

Adding VCU, Wichita and Gonzaga for BB and Olympics on top of the FB additions would create a dynamite BB conference. Last of the best. No more movement after that.

(10-04-2015 10:40 PM)StillJonesing Wrote:  

(10-04-2015 09:50 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Reading comprehension is your friend. Where exactly did I say anything about ECU's attendance being "bad"?

Nowhere does it say its attendance is bad. In fact---I said just the opposite---I said attendance was "good" (4th sentence of the first paragraph). The worst thing the post said was the ECU attendance "was typical of most G5s as recently as 2002"--then I describe how it began to rise in the following years and how it really took off in 2006.

The post is simply asking how ECU accomplished its hockey stick rise in attendance. It was actually brought up in a positive post on another site. The jist of that post was that the Houston numbers are now kinda similar to where ECU was 10 years ago---It asked the question----could we see a climb like ECU did? Listening to Billybobby blast the city schools made me curious as to what triggered ECU's climb.

You still aren't even doing 30k and were just at 24 to 27k the last two years. 2002 was an outliner brought about by bad weather and a late night Friday game the entire high school football association protested and called for fans to boycott the game and the lowest drawing game in probably 30 years. We still drew 29k for the year with a 4 win team.

We had averaged 37-42k the 3 years prior to that after the stadium expansion. Not only did we typically have some of the best G5 attendance we had some of the highest priced tickets and ticket revenue as far back as the early 2000's when I first became aware of that stuff. Even when we were winning 7 games in 3 years we still averaged over 31k or something like that which shows the complete baseline our fanbase has even in the roughest of times without 40k students and in a city of millions.

Attandance is always your fallback. Nice

We're not adding anyone
Simply, we can't afford it.
I called it here this will be another year of all hell breaking loose come playoff time, two things
1. If the b12 can't have a champion ship game with 10 no doubt they go to 12
2. At least 1 team from our league is gone.

If there is expansion in our future, we need to strike first.



The performance of the AAC this year has given us something to sell. The only scenario that makes 14 worthwhile includes Air Force. If we haven't reached out after this season, I think an Air Force - Colorado State package gives us long term security. Not to mention a damn cool conference with 2 Academies.

I've always suspected that our conference was named the American with that idea in mind.

This move both strengthens the AAC and cripples the MWC.

YES WE TAKE CSU AND AIR FORCE!

So many people are short cited. Does it make us stronger.... yes but not by much. they are 2 of the top 5 teams in the MWC year in and year out. So yes we get quality and we help with our brand since we would have 2 academies. Add in a scheduling agreement with Army and the "American" begins to look very American.

Second, it opens new markets and time zones for us. This allows us to sell more content at times the network needs.

Lastly.... and MOST importantly.... It Damages our nearest competitor going into negotiations for our new TV contract. If the AAC and MWC are viewed by networks as roughly equal, then they may not bid as hard for us and attempt to pickup the MWC for cheap.
the AAC and MWC will be the last piece on the market till 2025/26, so we need to make ourselves look the best we can. If we can make them less attractive while making ourselves more attractive, it will help.
Does it make us P6...hell no. Nothing does. Not even BYU.

I say expand with those 2 and see what kind of deal we can get in 2020. If its enough to tempt BYU, then we take them and add another (I like SDSU)... if not, then we have 14 teams and some cushion in case the Big 12 finally comes a calling.

(01-19-2016 07:07 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  YES WE TAKE CSU AND AIR FORCE!

So many people are short cited. Does it make us stronger.... yes but not by much. they are 2 of the top 5 teams in the MWC year in and year out. So yes we get quality and we help with our brand since we would have 2 academies. Add in a scheduling agreement with Army and the "American" begins to look very American.

Second, it opens new markets and time zones for us. This allows us to sell more content at times the network needs.

Lastly.... and MOST importantly.... It Damages our nearest competitor going into negotiations for our new TV contract. If the AAC and MWC are viewed by networks as roughly equal, then they may not bid as hard for us and attempt to pickup the MWC for cheap.
the AAC and MWC will be the last piece on the market till 2025/26, so we need to make ourselves look the best we can. If we can make them less attractive while making ourselves more attractive, it will help.
Does it make us P6...hell no. Nothing does. Not even BYU.

I say expand with those 2 and see what kind of deal we can get in 2020. If its enough to tempt BYU, then we take them and add another (I like SDSU)... if not, then we have 14 teams and some cushion in case the Big 12 finally comes a calling.

Please take them. That would let us boot out Wyoming and force Boise to change the way the TV deal is structured or they'd get the boot too. CSU's president is the one who largely authored the terrible TV contact.