Wait for the Western wing expansion, then grab Gonzaga.

/thread

WSU is a great fit for BB (no FB) & as along as Navy is in the conference for FB, it works. Some have mentioned St. Louis as a better addition. Are you kidding? St. Louis is a perennial middle of the pack or bottom dweller (losing record in CUSA) and the trend since Majerus is down - last in the A10 last season, and they have very little market interest even in the St Louis market. And the concern of having a BB member, referring to the BE is nonsense. The BE was a conference where the BB schools added FB schools, we're talking about adding one BB school to compensate for Navy being a FB only member. The addition of WSU would help AAC BB, period. It makes good sense regarding nat'l strength & adds a school that is BB crazy. What's not to like?

So don't get the addition of a BB school confused with overall conference expansion and since ND is coming to the AAC, there are no other schools that add program strength or pays financially. And to the damage the MWC argument, there is another view, that adding 2 MWC schools will actually dilute the current AAC advantage. Stand pat on all-sports schools unless they add financial benefit to the current conference members.

(12-14-2015 04:55 AM)HHOOTter Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 03:48 AM)STLWAVE Wrote:  If Wichita is being considered (even just on this forum and in our imaginations), wouldn't Saint Louis be a better fit? Geographically ties Cinci, Memphis, and Tulsa together very nicely. A beautiful basketball arena in the middle of the #21 biggest TV market. Basketball team hasn't been great since Majerus passed away but thats just one coaching hire away from being fixed. Soccer team would be a big plus and if you're gonna build a football team from scratch, at least SLU could piggyback off the Rams facilities for awhile.

After living in the Wichita St area 4 a few years:
WSU fans really do a great job supporting their team
All 3 media outlets & the local newspaper
give them “Shockers” top billing
Wichita is the 67th largest media market
(way behind several other Top 50 media market AAC school/locations)
That said,
Their influence & market is limited to the Wichita area media coverage
which includes most of western Kansas (2/3 of the state)
KC/Topeka area could care less about Wichita
Though WSU has a good fan base, Big 12 still has plenty of support here.
KU, KSU, OU, & OSU all have solid followings here
(All 4 schools located w/n 3 hours of the city of Wichita)
& all 4 Big 12 schools have organized clubs here which hold
yrly fan “caravans” where coaches, players, cheerleaders, etc
come to invigorate their alumni/fan base

All programs in all sports have a somewhat split fanbase because we all have likes and dislikes and dis-similar histories. I like Bama for instrance and prefer OU over OSU in state, but of course prefer TU over them all. But this really isn't about our likes and dislikes as much as what is presently best for the AAC conference. Some good folks are more concerned with MBB, others want a stronger WBB conference and others could care less about any sport not football.

What I see is an opening for a real quality program in the sport we need that is capable of winning a NC that has all the up front advantages of doing that. Right now, WSU has gone to a FF without the advatage of being in a premier conference - something that is very, very hard to do. With the help of a better conf with better seeds, there is a real possiblity they could not just get to the FF, but win the darn thing. But thats my opine.

I do know one thing, a better conference creates a better product and more money and it's based mostly on the quality of the programs in it. From everything I can tell, that is WSU.

I think Wichita would be a good add for the fans, but I have no idea if it makes sense financially for the league.

(12-14-2015 10:58 AM)lollaperuna Wrote:  I think Wichita would be a good add for the fans, but I have no idea if it makes sense financially for the league.

There isn't much revenue shared in our hoops deal. If they make the ncaa tourney 2 out of 5 years it would be a net $$$ add not including the added tv inventory for next contract.

(12-14-2015 10:58 AM)lollaperuna Wrote:  I think Wichita would be a good add for the fans, but I have no idea if it makes sense financially for the league.

IMO there are no negatives. They have the resources to do whatever they need to maintain the program, but need a better conference. The Koch brothers support them with millions of dollars and will renovate their already excellent basketball arena named after them. If they need an entrance or exit fee . . . no problem. The Koch's were the ones who made it possible for Marshall to get the pay increase btw.

(12-14-2015 07:09 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Wait for the Western wing expansion, then grab Gonzaga.

/thread

Gonzaga is a pretty good school as well. They don't do a lot of research, but they have a very strong undergraduate profile to make up for it. They're like Villanova in this regard.

ESPN would LOVE to assist the Gonzaga brand as well.

(12-14-2015 11:16 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 07:09 AM)HuskyU Wrote:  Wait for the Western wing expansion, then grab Gonzaga.

/thread

Gonzaga is a pretty good school as well. They don't do a lot of research, but they have a very strong undergraduate profile to make up for it. They're like Villanova in this regard.

ESPN would LOVE to assist the Gonzaga brand as well.

Only way Gonzaga makes sense is adding a western pod.

(12-14-2015 03:48 AM)STLWAVE Wrote:  If Wichita is being considered (even just on this forum and in our imaginations), wouldn't Saint Louis be a better fit? Geographically ties Cinci, Memphis, and Tulsa together very nicely. A beautiful basketball arena in the middle of the #21 biggest TV market. Basketball team hasn't been great since Majerus passed away but thats just one coaching hire away from being fixed. Soccer team would be a big plus and if you're gonna build a football team from scratch, at least SLU could piggyback off the Rams facilities for awhile.

I like Saint Louis too if we have to go to 12 for Olympic sports. Good post.

(12-11-2015 02:35 PM)uhcoog27 Wrote:  Is this serious?

Highly unlikely. The current members are not going to want to share revenues with another school that doesn't generate football revenues.

This conference was created on football and expansion will only occur if the football product benefits.


TX

(12-14-2015 11:13 AM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 10:58 AM)lollaperuna Wrote:  I think Wichita would be a good add for the fans, but I have no idea if it makes sense financially for the league.

IMO there are no negatives. They have the resources to do whatever they need to maintain the program, but need a better conference. The Koch brothers support them with millions of dollars and will renovate their already excellent basketball arena named after them. If they need an entrance or exit fee . . . no problem. The Koch's were the ones who made it possible for Marshall to get the pay increase btw.

No negatives? The football playing schools of the AAC are not going to give up any of their revenues to a basketball-Olympic sports only school. Also I don't imagine WSU is going to be all that interested in a basketball-only revenues.

Conference realignment is never about competition, geography, or a programs long term success, it's all about $$$$. Nevermind the fact WSU is unlikely to significantly increase the Basketball revenue, the creation of divisions will eliminate the virtual full round-robin scheduling. Also, the costs of compete ting in the AAC are much higher than the MVC.


TX

(12-14-2015 05:56 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 03:48 AM)STLWAVE Wrote:  If Wichita is being considered (even just on this forum and in our imaginations), wouldn't Saint Louis be a better fit? Geographically ties Cinci, Memphis, and Tulsa together very nicely. A beautiful basketball arena in the middle of the #21 biggest TV market. Basketball team hasn't been great since Majerus passed away but thats just one coaching hire away from being fixed. Soccer team would be a big plus and if you're gonna build a football team from scratch, at least SLU could piggyback off the Rams facilities for awhile.

I like Saint Louis too if we have to go to 12 for Olympic sports. Good post.

I like SLU a bit as well, but I would say WSU is certainly the better program (in basketball) I think it really comes down to WSU or VCU... and both are in a temporary wait-and-see period to me.

(12-14-2015 06:14 PM)texcane1982 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 11:13 AM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 10:58 AM)lollaperuna Wrote:  I think Wichita would be a good add for the fans, but I have no idea if it makes sense financially for the league.

IMO there are no negatives. They have the resources to do whatever they need to maintain the program, but need a better conference. The Koch brothers support them with millions of dollars and will renovate their already excellent basketball arena named after them. If they need an entrance or exit fee . . . no problem. The Koch's were the ones who made it possible for Marshall to get the pay increase btw.

No negatives? The football playing schools of the AAC are not going to give up any of their revenues to a basketball-Olympic sports only school. Also I don't imagine WSU is going to be all that interested in a basketball-only revenues.

Conference realignment is never about competition, geography, or a programs long term success, it's all about $$$$. Nevermind the fact WSU is unlikely to significantly increase the Basketball revenue, the creation of divisions will eliminate the virtual full round-robin scheduling. Also, the costs of compete ting in the AAC are much higher than the MVC.


TX

Wichita is obviously interested in basketball only revenue if they already approached the MW as the article indicates. As for the AAC football schools, they wouldn't be sharing football money---just basketball money---and NCAA credits earned AFTER Wichita joins the conference. For instance, it would be similar to Navy, who will not be sharing in AAC basketball revenue. Adding Wichita amounts to a loss of around $50K a school plus a share of future NCAA credit earnings after Wichita joins (which Wichita is likely to contribute toward). Is it worth 50K to play in a better conference? I think it is. Frankly, I question the commitment to top tier athletics of any member that doesn't think its worth it.

(12-14-2015 06:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 05:56 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 03:48 AM)STLWAVE Wrote:  If Wichita is being considered (even just on this forum and in our imaginations), wouldn't Saint Louis be a better fit? Geographically ties Cinci, Memphis, and Tulsa together very nicely. A beautiful basketball arena in the middle of the #21 biggest TV market. Basketball team hasn't been great since Majerus passed away but thats just one coaching hire away from being fixed. Soccer team would be a big plus and if you're gonna build a football team from scratch, at least SLU could piggyback off the Rams facilities for awhile.

I like Saint Louis too if we have to go to 12 for Olympic sports. Good post.

I like SLU a bit as well, but I would say WSU is certainly the better program (in basketball) I think it really comes down to WSU or VCU... and both are in a temporary wait-and-see period to me.

St Louis makes the "AAC map" look better with Missouri filling in the gaps a bit. You have to admit the gaps are pretty big in the conference, while the SEC, Big, MWC etc are pretty tight groupings for as many schools as they have. I know realignment is all about getting big tv markets, but there is a reason why conferences have traditionally made pictures, logos etc. with bolded parts of their regions front and center to show who they are. That's why I've never wanted Boise or SDSU in the AAC. I know we are the "American" BUT I don't like the idea of a conference that goes from Conneticut to Idaho; kind of defeats the purpose of even having a conference. JMHO. Cheers!

(12-14-2015 11:46 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 06:29 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 05:56 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 03:48 AM)STLWAVE Wrote:  If Wichita is being considered (even just on this forum and in our imaginations), wouldn't Saint Louis be a better fit? Geographically ties Cinci, Memphis, and Tulsa together very nicely. A beautiful basketball arena in the middle of the #21 biggest TV market. Basketball team hasn't been great since Majerus passed away but thats just one coaching hire away from being fixed. Soccer team would be a big plus and if you're gonna build a football team from scratch, at least SLU could piggyback off the Rams facilities for awhile.

I like Saint Louis too if we have to go to 12 for Olympic sports. Good post.

I like SLU a bit as well, but I would say WSU is certainly the better program (in basketball) I think it really comes down to WSU or VCU... and both are in a temporary wait-and-see period to me.

St Louis makes the "AAC map" look better with Missouri filling in the gaps a bit. You have to admit the gaps are pretty big in the conference, while the SEC, Big, MWC etc are pretty tight groupings for as many schools as they have. I know realignment is all about getting big tv markets, but there is a reason why conferences have traditionally made pictures, logos etc. with bolded parts of their regions front and center to show who they are. That's why I've never wanted Boise or SDSU in the AAC. I know we are the "American" BUT I don't like the idea of a conference that goes from Conneticut to Idaho; kind of defeats the purpose of even having a conference. JMHO. Cheers!

The truth is conference building has never been about a region. It's first about like minded schools---then it's about region. The AAC is made of like minded schools that are committed to playing at the very highest level of FBS but were left out of the dominate regional conferences in thier individual areas. There are really noe more available G5 schools east of the Rockies that are as financially committed as AAC schools. There are, however, several schools in the west that would fit the profile.

(12-13-2015 07:08 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(12-13-2015 05:01 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(12-13-2015 04:49 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(12-12-2015 09:39 AM)Cubanbull Wrote:  I think Aresco is a smart man and if you think he is not in touch with the tv people about what would add value to the league then you haven't been paying attention to the last moves all because of tv value.
I do think that now that the league has momentum might be a good time to expand but that doesn't happen unless the tv contract can be renegotiated because of expansion and we get 4-5 million per team. If that's not an option then we stay as we are.
I understand those that want WSU to match Navy in the basketball side and while they are a good program, basketball is not driving the tv money needle and I doubt adding them will increase the tv money.

The Big East conference is making more than twice as much money than you guys for pretty much just basketball.

Just wanted to point that out.

Instability was this league's biggest challange to entertaining a respectable deal $$$ from the start, this isn't a problem anymore.

I think instability was a factor in the tv negotiations, only one though. The major problem was that the Big East was a tweener conference in reality.

It would not shock me if ESPN offered you guys 5-6 mil per team on a long term contract. But you guys will not be able to get a tie in with a major bowl due the contracts in place. So the only way for you guys to become a major conference would be sustained on the field success. Which would require a lot of things to fall your way.

1. Actually get offered 5+ million in TV money to separate from the rest of the G5 financially.
2. Get the access bowl three or more times in a row.
3. Get BYU to join with Boise.

BYU AF would be better, and if BYU isn't in the deal take AF/Colorado St.
Weaken MWC so Boise becomes like Marshall in CUSA. They need to go undefeated while facing 2 loss AAC schools to have a shot at access bid.
Boise will become irrelevant quickly.

(12-14-2015 06:34 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 06:14 PM)texcane1982 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 11:13 AM)rabidTU2 Wrote:  

(12-14-2015 10:58 AM)lollaperuna Wrote:  I think Wichita would be a good add for the fans, but I have no idea if it makes sense financially for the league.

IMO there are no negatives. They have the resources to do whatever they need to maintain the program, but need a better conference. The Koch brothers support them with millions of dollars and will renovate their already excellent basketball arena named after them. If they need an entrance or exit fee . . . no problem. The Koch's were the ones who made it possible for Marshall to get the pay increase btw.

No negatives? The football playing schools of the AAC are not going to give up any of their revenues to a basketball-Olympic sports only school. Also I don't imagine WSU is going to be all that interested in a basketball-only revenues.

Conference realignment is never about competition, geography, or a programs long term success, it's all about $$$$. Nevermind the fact WSU is unlikely to significantly increase the Basketball revenue, the creation of divisions will eliminate the virtual full round-robin scheduling. Also, the costs of compete ting in the AAC are much higher than the MVC.


TX

Wichita is obviously interested in basketball only revenue if they already approached the MW as the article indicates. As for the AAC football schools, they wouldn't be sharing football money---just basketball money---and NCAA credits earned AFTER Wichita joins the conference. For instance, it would be similar to Navy, who will not be sharing in AAC basketball revenue. Adding Wichita amounts to a loss of around $50K a school plus a share of future NCAA credit earnings after Wichita joins (which Wichita is likely to contribute toward). Is it worth 50K to play in a better conference? I think it is. Frankly, I question the commitment to top tier athletics of any member that doesn't think its worth it.

Spot on. They will very likely make the tourney every few years so it is a net $$$ add. We also need to show espn another market with valuable hoops content. They would help with tv negotiations with hoops teams like uconn, Memphis, smu, Wichita State, Cincinnati, etc. I'd grab them assuming football is off the table.

(12-12-2015 11:09 AM)hawghiggs Wrote:  Why would the AAC bring in Wichita state? If ya'll are going to expand. Go after Colorado state & New Mexico. The AAC would get two great media markets, a bowl game, and would be able to deliver a death blow to the MWC.

I have wondered if the MWC thought about expanding to add UTEP and Rice, because they (the MWC) may think that they could lose two schools to the AAC.

If the debate is about an Olympics sports only member, and the candidates are Wichita, St Louis, and VCU... IF we were going to add anyone, the AAC will probably be cautious about who has won more recently. As we've seen, winning can fluctuate wildly from year to year. Building a conference to last decades, student body size, market and potential matter more.

FWIW, I bet you can get direct flights to Richmond or St Louis much easier than Wichita... And as WV found out after joining the B12, easy travel also matters.

(12-15-2015 11:06 AM)Bull Wrote:  If the debate is about an Olympics sports only member, and the candidates are Wichita, St Louis, and VCU... IF we were going to add anyone, the AAC will probably be cautious about who has won more recently. As we've seen, winning can fluctuate wildly from year to year. Building a conference to last decades, student body size, market and potential matter more.

FWIW, I bet you can get direct flights to Richmond or St Louis much easier than Wichita... And as WV found out after joining the B12, easy travel also matters.

Out of the three, St. Louis is definitely the most attractive city. They have some pretty neat stuff to do there.