(09-19-2016 11:16 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 02:15 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 01:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 12:08 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  If Temple can capitulate on Rhule, ECU and UCF realize their former selves, and one of the private schools in the west really turns the corner, this could be a P5 conference in all but tv revenue. The NY6 bid would be all but officially ours.

Sure....until Houston and Cincinnati leave for the Big 12.

The AAC is in the same position the MW was back in 2009. The MW had Utah, TCU, BYU, and Boise was begging to get in. Had the MW added Boise State then, the Pac had not taken Utah, the MW was going to get BCS inclusion.

Sorry guys, I like your conference, but unfortunately, due to realignment, the AAC is going to fall back a notch.

Your nervous I get it. If I was in your shoes I would be as well. But even if we loose two teams we are going to be better than the MWC. The MWC is an after thought on the East Coast. The only G5 school that exists in peoples minds on the East Coast is Boise.

So rock on San Diego guy. Continue to watch as the MWC becomes more irrelevant while the AAC makes smart moves going forward that keeps the conference on top.

But hey, enjoy your Zoo and the weather.

What happens if we tighten said teams?

Aha, your the only one who passed the test on lose vs loose. Its a little test I give every once and while when I believe the board is getting to slack on its grammar. Um, something like that.

(09-19-2016 01:04 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:08 AM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 11:48 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  As of September 17, 2016, the AAC has pulled away from the other G5's. The MAC is closing ground on the MWC and CUSA is dead last. Aresco's narrative of the AAC being a P6 is looking solid.

1. SEC 38.75
2. Pac 12 42.53
3 Big 10 46.88
4 ACC 50.59
5 Big 12 52.00
6 AAC 64.51
7 FBS Indep 67.16
8 MWC 81.07
9 MAC 84.03
10 Sun Belt 94.97
11 CUSA 96.15

http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

None of it matters. There will never be a recognized P6. In fact, there is a much greater chance that there will be a P4 before a P6. Frankly, the SEC and B1G want consolidation into 4 conferences of 16 plus ND. IF the Big XII adds two more, that would make it 66. That poses a problem. The next number that works (i.e. divisible by 4) is 80 and they DON't want to split the pie that much.

When the next AAC tv deal comes up, you will see a fall. Why? Because the old market based (that is number of cable boxes) negotiation is no longer a driving force due to the bleeding of subscribers not only by ESPN by by cable companies as a whole. The only conferences that they can count on to deliver are the now P5. They get the money and ESPN will say take what we offer to rest. CBSSN, NBCSN and Fox are not going to throw beau coup bucks at anyone when they don't have to either. Do I hate it. You damn right. But nothing can be done. It's the old golden rule....he who has the gold (ESPN) makes the rule.

Jeez. You have been drinking waaaaaaay too much CUSA board koolaide.

Look, I agree---we will likely never be a P6---but the idea our payout is going to fall from its current paltry 2 million per team is just not based in reality. Its based on the CUSA experience---which has nothing to do with the AAC.

The reason the CUSA deal feel so dramatically was the new conference composition---not the cable industry. The Big 10 deal is four times larger than its old deal. How did that happen if the whole cable industry is collapsing and all deals are plummeting??

Here is the deal. CUSA's issue is viewership. Last year CUSA had one game that exceeded 500K viewers. One. That's why CUSA got cut back to $200K a team. They are drawing viewers like the Sunbelt so they receive Sunbelt pay.

On the other hand, the AAC had 19 games in their TV package that exceeded 1 million viewers. The value of having nearly 20 games with a million+ viewers included in a TV package is light years beyond the selling a package who's big gun is a single 500K viewer game. You cant use the CUSA experience to extrapolate the AAC value. The two products are nothing alike.

The reality is, due to instability, a weak negotiating position, and the lack of a national broadcast track record, the AAC was badly underpaid when it signed its contact in 2013. Since that time, the AAC has vastly out performed expectations both on the field and in the TV ratings.

The opposite was true of CUSA. CUSA had 3 years of its new configuration to prove it had a value that was similar to the old CUSA. Its performance on the field and (more importantly) its ratings have failed miserably in that effort and that is why it now makes $200K a team.

The situations couldn't be more different.

First, I am not drinking kool aid. Second, my information comes from people that I know in the television/communications industry not affiliated with CUSA. The B1G got what it got because regardless of how they go in the future, it is going to be through some outlet such as a conference channel or another platform that will be pay per view. The look at the number of B1G alumni and the attendance numbers and extrapolate from there. That means that they have the greatest return. Plus, the over the air networks need advertising dollars. Those conferences draw the bigger audiences.

They really don't care if they have any of the G5. They will just put more of the P5 on their networks. ESPN now broadcasts every SEC game between SEC teams. The only ones you are seeing on the SEC network are the SEC OCC games against G5 or FCS. Later in the year, those will be replaced with the conference games betweenhe bottom dwellers.

ESPN just lost 50% of their Big10 inventory and the ACC will soon be starting a new network, thinning the available inventory options from the ACC. The AAC is getting ratings that approach P5 ratings for a very very low price (not to mention ESPN also makes money by selling off AAC inventory to CBS-Sports).

Once the 50% Big10 inventory heads for FOX the AAC will be needed to fill in those broadcast windows. That has value for ESPN. Given the current AAC ratings, ESPN could pay 2-5 times as much for the AAC and still consider it a bargain. The AAC has proven itself in ratings---this time around, there will be additional bidders---so low balling wont be an option this time around.

My guess is that we never make it to the open market. Its in ESPN's best interests to negotiate an early extension that increases the pay of the AAC and locks it up at least through the end of the new Big 10 contract (which is just 6 years long).

(09-19-2016 02:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 01:04 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:08 AM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 11:48 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  As of September 17, 2016, the AAC has pulled away from the other G5's. The MAC is closing ground on the MWC and CUSA is dead last. Aresco's narrative of the AAC being a P6 is looking solid.

1. SEC 38.75
2. Pac 12 42.53
3 Big 10 46.88
4 ACC 50.59
5 Big 12 52.00
6 AAC 64.51
7 FBS Indep 67.16
8 MWC 81.07
9 MAC 84.03
10 Sun Belt 94.97
11 CUSA 96.15

http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

None of it matters. There will never be a recognized P6. In fact, there is a much greater chance that there will be a P4 before a P6. Frankly, the SEC and B1G want consolidation into 4 conferences of 16 plus ND. IF the Big XII adds two more, that would make it 66. That poses a problem. The next number that works (i.e. divisible by 4) is 80 and they DON't want to split the pie that much.

When the next AAC tv deal comes up, you will see a fall. Why? Because the old market based (that is number of cable boxes) negotiation is no longer a driving force due to the bleeding of subscribers not only by ESPN by by cable companies as a whole. The only conferences that they can count on to deliver are the now P5. They get the money and ESPN will say take what we offer to rest. CBSSN, NBCSN and Fox are not going to throw beau coup bucks at anyone when they don't have to either. Do I hate it. You damn right. But nothing can be done. It's the old golden rule....he who has the gold (ESPN) makes the rule.

Jeez. You have been drinking waaaaaaay too much CUSA board koolaide.

Look, I agree---we will likely never be a P6---but the idea our payout is going to fall from its current paltry 2 million per team is just not based in reality. Its based on the CUSA experience---which has nothing to do with the AAC.

The reason the CUSA deal feel so dramatically was the new conference composition---not the cable industry. The Big 10 deal is four times larger than its old deal. How did that happen if the whole cable industry is collapsing and all deals are plummeting??

Here is the deal. CUSA's issue is viewership. Last year CUSA had one game that exceeded 500K viewers. One. That's why CUSA got cut back to $200K a team. They are drawing viewers like the Sunbelt so they receive Sunbelt pay.

On the other hand, the AAC had 19 games in their TV package that exceeded 1 million viewers. The value of having nearly 20 games with a million+ viewers included in a TV package is light years beyond the selling a package who's big gun is a single 500K viewer game. You cant use the CUSA experience to extrapolate the AAC value. The two products are nothing alike.

The reality is, due to instability, a weak negotiating position, and the lack of a national broadcast track record, the AAC was badly underpaid when it signed its contact in 2013. Since that time, the AAC has vastly out performed expectations both on the field and in the TV ratings.

The opposite was true of CUSA. CUSA had 3 years of its new configuration to prove it had a value that was similar to the old CUSA. Its performance on the field and (more importantly) its ratings have failed miserably in that effort and that is why it now makes $200K a team.

The situations couldn't be more different.

First, I am not drinking kool aid. Second, my information comes from people that I know in the television/communications industry not affiliated with CUSA. The B1G got what it got because regardless of how they go in the future, it is going to be through some outlet such as a conference channel or another platform that will be pay per view. The look at the number of B1G alumni and the attendance numbers and extrapolate from there. That means that they have the greatest return. Plus, the over the air networks need advertising dollars. Those conferences draw the bigger audiences.

They really don't care if they have any of the G5. They will just put more of the P5 on their networks. ESPN now broadcasts every SEC game between SEC teams. The only ones you are seeing on the SEC network are the SEC OCC games against G5 or FCS. Later in the year, those will be replaced with the conference games betweenhe bottom dwellers.

ESPN just lost 50% of their Big10 inventory and the ACC will soon be starting a new network, thinning the available inventory options from the ACC. The AAC is getting ratings that approach P5 ratings for a very very low price (not to mention ESPN also makes money by selling off AAC inventory to CBS-Sports).

Once the 50% Big10 inventory heads for FOX the AAC will be needed to fill in those broadcast windows. That has value for ESPN. Given the current AAC ratings, ESPN could pay 2-5 times as much for the AAC and still consider it a bargain. The AAC has proven itself in ratings---this time around, there will be additional bidders---so low balling wont be an option this time around.

My guess is that we never make it to the open market. Its in ESPN's best interests to negotiate an early extension that increases the pay of the AAC and locks it up at least through the end of the new Big 10 contract (which is just 6 years long).

Let us hope you are right.


.

(09-19-2016 01:10 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:16 AM)DefCONNOne Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 02:15 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 01:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 12:08 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  If Temple can capitulate on Rhule, ECU and UCF realize their former selves, and one of the private schools in the west really turns the corner, this could be a P5 conference in all but tv revenue. The NY6 bid would be all but officially ours.

Sure....until Houston and Cincinnati leave for the Big 12.

The AAC is in the same position the MW was back in 2009. The MW had Utah, TCU, BYU, and Boise was begging to get in. Had the MW added Boise State then, the Pac had not taken Utah, the MW was going to get BCS inclusion.

Sorry guys, I like your conference, but unfortunately, due to realignment, the AAC is going to fall back a notch.

Your nervous I get it. If I was in your shoes I would be as well. But even if we loose two teams we are going to be better than the MWC. The MWC is an after thought on the East Coast. The only G5 school that exists in peoples minds on the East Coast is Boise.

So rock on San Diego guy. Continue to watch as the MWC becomes more irrelevant while the AAC makes smart moves going forward that keeps the conference on top.

But hey, enjoy your Zoo and the weather.

What happens if we tighten said teams?

Aha, your the only one who passed the test on lose vs loose. Its a little test I give every once and while when I believe the board is getting to slack on its grammar. Um, something like that.

*too

(09-19-2016 12:07 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 11:50 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 10:40 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:31 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 08:01 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  We are closer to the B12 than the MWC is to us.

Top to bottom the AAC is certainly a better conference than the MW. No doubt about it.

However, the top of the MW and the top of the AAC are virtually the same.

There is little difference between SDSU, Boise, and Air Force when comparing them to Houston, Temple and Navy (Top teams based on final standings from last year). In fact, if Houston loses a conference game and loses to Louisville, the MW is probably going to be the NYD Bowl Game since it is likely Boise, Air Force and San Diego State will be in the Top 25 in November.

The difference is, your teams that follow your top tier, are far superior to that of the MW. However, once Houston and Cinci leave, it will all even out.

It sucks but the AAC is on borrowed time, just as the MW was in 2009. I for one want to see all G5 conferences rise, and root for the AAC in every game against the P5.

Ummm, you had better hope that USF loses a game or two too. USF plays FSU this weekend. If USF gets through that game and go undefeated for a while, then Boise State, SDSU and AF is going to be behind USF too.

While I doubt USF beats Florida State, I think you underestimate being the "incumbent." Being ranked in the AP early, directly effects perception from everyone, including the committee late in the year. A 12-0 Boise and SDSU playing each other in the MWC Championship game gets in in front of USF.

You probably felt the same way about Houston being able to beat FSU last year as you feel about USF being able to beat FSU this year. USF can beat FSU, because the top and the middle programs in the AAC and the ACC are closer than people think. Hell ECU has ran through middle of the ACC like a hot knife through butter over the last few years; so I know that USF can beat FSU.

Moreover, I think that you underestimate the perception of how much stronger the AAC is viewed in comparison to the MWC. Just two years back; ECU got ranked in the first CFP poll before Boise State and Colorado State. If USF wins this weekend; I would be shocked if USF didn't jump both SDSU and Boise State. Unfortunatley for Boise State and SDSU; you will need AAC teams to beat up on each other before either school would get a sniff of the access bowl.

You nailed it, PirateMarv

MWC teams really need some quality OOC wins, and I'm not talking about beating up on unranked P5 teams. Got to get better OOC scheduling to even have that opportunity though. Nothing worse than having the potential to take down Stanford, or Washington, or USC and being stuck playing playing New Hampshire, NIU, ULL, etc.

(09-19-2016 03:17 PM)fishpro1098 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 02:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 01:04 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:08 AM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  None of it matters. There will never be a recognized P6. In fact, there is a much greater chance that there will be a P4 before a P6. Frankly, the SEC and B1G want consolidation into 4 conferences of 16 plus ND. IF the Big XII adds two more, that would make it 66. That poses a problem. The next number that works (i.e. divisible by 4) is 80 and they DON't want to split the pie that much.

When the next AAC tv deal comes up, you will see a fall. Why? Because the old market based (that is number of cable boxes) negotiation is no longer a driving force due to the bleeding of subscribers not only by ESPN by by cable companies as a whole. The only conferences that they can count on to deliver are the now P5. They get the money and ESPN will say take what we offer to rest. CBSSN, NBCSN and Fox are not going to throw beau coup bucks at anyone when they don't have to either. Do I hate it. You damn right. But nothing can be done. It's the old golden rule....he who has the gold (ESPN) makes the rule.

Jeez. You have been drinking waaaaaaay too much CUSA board koolaide.

Look, I agree---we will likely never be a P6---but the idea our payout is going to fall from its current paltry 2 million per team is just not based in reality. Its based on the CUSA experience---which has nothing to do with the AAC.

The reason the CUSA deal feel so dramatically was the new conference composition---not the cable industry. The Big 10 deal is four times larger than its old deal. How did that happen if the whole cable industry is collapsing and all deals are plummeting??

Here is the deal. CUSA's issue is viewership. Last year CUSA had one game that exceeded 500K viewers. One. That's why CUSA got cut back to $200K a team. They are drawing viewers like the Sunbelt so they receive Sunbelt pay.

On the other hand, the AAC had 19 games in their TV package that exceeded 1 million viewers. The value of having nearly 20 games with a million+ viewers included in a TV package is light years beyond the selling a package who's big gun is a single 500K viewer game. You cant use the CUSA experience to extrapolate the AAC value. The two products are nothing alike.

The reality is, due to instability, a weak negotiating position, and the lack of a national broadcast track record, the AAC was badly underpaid when it signed its contact in 2013. Since that time, the AAC has vastly out performed expectations both on the field and in the TV ratings.

The opposite was true of CUSA. CUSA had 3 years of its new configuration to prove it had a value that was similar to the old CUSA. Its performance on the field and (more importantly) its ratings have failed miserably in that effort and that is why it now makes $200K a team.

The situations couldn't be more different.

First, I am not drinking kool aid. Second, my information comes from people that I know in the television/communications industry not affiliated with CUSA. The B1G got what it got because regardless of how they go in the future, it is going to be through some outlet such as a conference channel or another platform that will be pay per view. The look at the number of B1G alumni and the attendance numbers and extrapolate from there. That means that they have the greatest return. Plus, the over the air networks need advertising dollars. Those conferences draw the bigger audiences.

They really don't care if they have any of the G5. They will just put more of the P5 on their networks. ESPN now broadcasts every SEC game between SEC teams. The only ones you are seeing on the SEC network are the SEC OCC games against G5 or FCS. Later in the year, those will be replaced with the conference games betweenhe bottom dwellers.

ESPN just lost 50% of their Big10 inventory and the ACC will soon be starting a new network, thinning the available inventory options from the ACC. The AAC is getting ratings that approach P5 ratings for a very very low price (not to mention ESPN also makes money by selling off AAC inventory to CBS-Sports).

Once the 50% Big10 inventory heads for FOX the AAC will be needed to fill in those broadcast windows. That has value for ESPN. Given the current AAC ratings, ESPN could pay 2-5 times as much for the AAC and still consider it a bargain. The AAC has proven itself in ratings---this time around, there will be additional bidders---so low balling wont be an option this time around.

My guess is that we never make it to the open market. Its in ESPN's best interests to negotiate an early extension that increases the pay of the AAC and locks it up at least through the end of the new Big 10 contract (which is just 6 years long).

Let us hope you are right.


.

I don't see why it won't happen... I mean, IF Houston and Cincinnati are offered membership elsewhere the AAC will still be with exceptional solid name programs like -

Navy
ECU
USF
UConn
UCF
Temple
Memphis
Tulsa

I know I know, I might as well put all the remaining AAC lineup but let's be real here, most all AAC programs have impressive backbone football history.

(09-19-2016 04:03 PM)Comet Wrote:  MWC teams really need some quality OOC wins, and I'm not talking about beating up on unranked P5 teams. Got to get better OOC scheduling to even have that opportunity though. Nothing worse than having the potential to take down Stanford, or Washington, or USC and being stuck playing playing New Hampshire, NIU, ULL, etc.

Agreed, SDSU has Home and Homes with Arizona State and Stanford in 2017 and 2018, then has a Home and Home with UCLA in 2019 and 2020.

(09-19-2016 05:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 03:17 PM)fishpro1098 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 02:40 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 01:04 PM)PaulDel2 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 11:48 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Jeez. You have been drinking waaaaaaay too much CUSA board koolaide.

Look, I agree---we will likely never be a P6---but the idea our payout is going to fall from its current paltry 2 million per team is just not based in reality. Its based on the CUSA experience---which has nothing to do with the AAC.

The reason the CUSA deal feel so dramatically was the new conference composition---not the cable industry. The Big 10 deal is four times larger than its old deal. How did that happen if the whole cable industry is collapsing and all deals are plummeting??

Here is the deal. CUSA's issue is viewership. Last year CUSA had one game that exceeded 500K viewers. One. That's why CUSA got cut back to $200K a team. They are drawing viewers like the Sunbelt so they receive Sunbelt pay.

On the other hand, the AAC had 19 games in their TV package that exceeded 1 million viewers. The value of having nearly 20 games with a million+ viewers included in a TV package is light years beyond the selling a package who's big gun is a single 500K viewer game. You cant use the CUSA experience to extrapolate the AAC value. The two products are nothing alike.

The reality is, due to instability, a weak negotiating position, and the lack of a national broadcast track record, the AAC was badly underpaid when it signed its contact in 2013. Since that time, the AAC has vastly out performed expectations both on the field and in the TV ratings.

The opposite was true of CUSA. CUSA had 3 years of its new configuration to prove it had a value that was similar to the old CUSA. Its performance on the field and (more importantly) its ratings have failed miserably in that effort and that is why it now makes $200K a team.

The situations couldn't be more different.

First, I am not drinking kool aid. Second, my information comes from people that I know in the television/communications industry not affiliated with CUSA. The B1G got what it got because regardless of how they go in the future, it is going to be through some outlet such as a conference channel or another platform that will be pay per view. The look at the number of B1G alumni and the attendance numbers and extrapolate from there. That means that they have the greatest return. Plus, the over the air networks need advertising dollars. Those conferences draw the bigger audiences.

They really don't care if they have any of the G5. They will just put more of the P5 on their networks. ESPN now broadcasts every SEC game between SEC teams. The only ones you are seeing on the SEC network are the SEC OCC games against G5 or FCS. Later in the year, those will be replaced with the conference games betweenhe bottom dwellers.

ESPN just lost 50% of their Big10 inventory and the ACC will soon be starting a new network, thinning the available inventory options from the ACC. The AAC is getting ratings that approach P5 ratings for a very very low price (not to mention ESPN also makes money by selling off AAC inventory to CBS-Sports).

Once the 50% Big10 inventory heads for FOX the AAC will be needed to fill in those broadcast windows. That has value for ESPN. Given the current AAC ratings, ESPN could pay 2-5 times as much for the AAC and still consider it a bargain. The AAC has proven itself in ratings---this time around, there will be additional bidders---so low balling wont be an option this time around.

My guess is that we never make it to the open market. Its in ESPN's best interests to negotiate an early extension that increases the pay of the AAC and locks it up at least through the end of the new Big 10 contract (which is just 6 years long).

Let us hope you are right.


.

I don't see why it won't happen... I mean, IF Houston and Cincinnati are offered membership elsewhere the AAC will still be with exceptional solid name programs like -

Navy
ECU
USF
UConn
UCF
Temple
Memphis
Tulsa

I know I know, I might as well put all the remaining AAC lineup but let's be real here, most all AAC programs have impressive backbone football history.

See---when I look at that group of schools I see the perfect group to merge with the top MW schools to create a "best of the rest" national conference.

(09-19-2016 09:59 AM)isidnirb Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

News in San Diego is not national news. You will forever be hurt by east coast bias. Just the facts.

https://twitter.com/GoAztecs/status/777989026682765312

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

(09-19-2016 07:30 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

I agree that if USF beats FSU, USF will jump SDSU in the polls.

(09-18-2016 02:15 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 01:11 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-18-2016 12:08 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  If Temple can capitulate on Rhule, ECU and UCF realize their former selves, and one of the private schools in the west really turns the corner, this could be a P5 conference in all but tv revenue. The NY6 bid would be all but officially ours.

Sure....until Houston and Cincinnati leave for the Big 12.

The AAC is in the same position the MW was back in 2009. The MW had Utah, TCU, BYU, and Boise was begging to get in. Had the MW added Boise State then, the Pac had not taken Utah, the MW was going to get BCS inclusion.

Sorry guys, I like your conference, but unfortunately, due to realignment, the AAC is going to fall back a notch.

Your nervous I get it. If I was in your shoes I would be as well. But even if we loose two teams we are going to be better than the MWC. The MWC is an after thought on the East Coast. The only G5 school that exists in peoples minds on the East Coast is Boise.

So rock on San Diego guy. Continue to watch as the MWC becomes more irrelevant while the AAC makes smart moves going forward that keeps the conference on top.

But hey, enjoy your Zoo and the weather.

Let's not pretend like SDSU along with any of their MWC brethren they wanted to bring with them would be welcomed into the AAC with open arms by the fans on here.
I really like the current AAC line up and would be thrilled if this 12 team line up stayed intact forever. Things are really looking good for the AAC. It's actually surpassed my expectations by a lot. I speak as a fan of a school who will not be going anywhere and maybe I'm being a little selfish in hoping Cincy and Houston don't leave us.
Cheers!

(09-19-2016 07:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:30 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

I agree that if USF beats FSU, USF will jump SDSU in the polls.

I predicted that SDSU would go 12-0 and host Boise in the MWC championship game. I predicted Houston would go 12-0 and get the Auto Bid....but if the Coogs slip up once and it's a 12-0 SDSU vs a 12-0 Boise for all the marbles.....lots of people on here won't like that lol!
Cheers!

(09-19-2016 08:21 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:30 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

I agree that if USF beats FSU, USF will jump SDSU in the polls.

I predicted that SDSU would go 12-0 and host Boise in the MWC championship game. I predicted Houston would go 12-0 and get the Auto Bid....but if the Coogs slip up once and it's a 12-0 SDSU vs a 12-0 Boise for all the marbles.....lots of people on here won't like that lol!
Cheers!

look at both their schedules..
look at how the committee has weighted schedules to date

they need houston to lose twice

theyd jump us with 1 loss in the AP but zero chance in the committee poll...

(09-19-2016 08:21 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:30 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:25 AM)ECBrad Wrote:  Wow a SDSU fan is reading more news about SDSSu than USF. Guess this proves things and the MWC isn't 2-11 in OOC against the p-5 and 9-15 against fbs generally.

ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

I agree that if USF beats FSU, USF will jump SDSU in the polls.

I predicted that SDSU would go 12-0 and host Boise in the MWC championship game. I predicted Houston would go 12-0 and get the Auto Bid....but if the Coogs slip up once and it's a 12-0 SDSU vs a 12-0 Boise for all the marbles.....lots of people on here won't like that lol!
Cheers!

I am not going to say that both Boise State and SDSU will be undefeated, as it is a long season and playing on the road in the MW is more challenging than people think. However, if both teams are undefeated, and Houston has lost to Louisville badly, it is very possible that Boise or SDSU is chosen ahead of Houston. If Houston has two losses, it is almost certain that boise or SDSU gets the bid.

(09-19-2016 08:32 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:21 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:30 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

I agree that if USF beats FSU, USF will jump SDSU in the polls.

I predicted that SDSU would go 12-0 and host Boise in the MWC championship game. I predicted Houston would go 12-0 and get the Auto Bid....but if the Coogs slip up once and it's a 12-0 SDSU vs a 12-0 Boise for all the marbles.....lots of people on here won't like that lol!
Cheers!

I am not going to say that both Boise State and SDSU will be undefeated, as it is a long season and playing on the road in the MW is more challenging than people think. However, if both teams are undefeated, and Houston has lost to Louisville badly, it is very possible that Boise or SDSU is chosen ahead of Houston. If Houston has two losses, it is almost certain that boise or SDSU gets the bid.

We get that you're excited about your team, but you're spewing a bunch of nonsense.

Assuming we each take care of business, UL vs. UH is just a handful of upsets away from being a #1 vs. #2 matchup. If we were to lose to UL and only UL, there is a 0% chance an undefeated Boise or SDSU get the NY6 bid over us. Like I already mentioned, you have a "Marshall" problem in that you aren't going to soar up the CFP poll by beating nobodies every week. Marshall was 11-0 in 2014, and the highest they ever got was #24 in the CFP poll. SDSU may get a little higher than that, but no where near the top 5-10 where UH would be at 12-1, with their only loss to potentially the #1 team in the nation.

(09-19-2016 08:32 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:21 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:30 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 09:11 AM)fanhood Wrote:  ESPN and CBS are certainly giving SDSU more publicity than USF. Obviously, this means little right now, but it still provides indication that the SDSU is getting more national publicity.

They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

I agree that if USF beats FSU, USF will jump SDSU in the polls.

I predicted that SDSU would go 12-0 and host Boise in the MWC championship game. I predicted Houston would go 12-0 and get the Auto Bid....but if the Coogs slip up once and it's a 12-0 SDSU vs a 12-0 Boise for all the marbles.....lots of people on here won't like that lol!
Cheers!

I am not going to say that both Boise State and SDSU will be undefeated, as it is a long season and playing on the road in the MW is more challenging than people think. However, if both teams are undefeated, and Houston has lost to Louisville badly, it is very possible that Boise or SDSU is chosen ahead of Houston. If Houston has two losses, it is almost certain that boise or SDSU gets the bid.

I hope that you study up on how the CFP poll works, before the first one comes out in a few weeks. SDSU is at 22 in the AP poll, but you might be completely unranked when the CFP poll comes out in a few weeks; because the CFP polls looks at your league's strength and who you have played. That is why the road for Boise State and SDSU to get the access game is going to be bumpier than the road for the AAC schools. That is why people keep track of conference strength as well as individual schools records.

The AAC is a much stronger league than the MWC. Boise State and SDSU need the AAC teams to beat up on each other in order for Boise State, SDSU and for that matter any MAC team to have a shot at the access game. MWC and MAC schools need to be undefeated AND every AAC team needs to have at least 2 losses in order for the MWC or the MAC champion to have a shot at the access game. If the AAC champion only has one loss then the AAC is going to get the access game; and that is the case even if the MWC has an undefeated champion. Just a couple of years ago neither Marshall of CUSA nor Colorado State of the MWC could pass ECU of the AAC in the CFP poll until ECU had it's usual end of year melt down. Last year Toledo of the MAC could not pass Houston, Memphis, Temple and Navy of the AAC until all the AAC teams started beating up on each other. The AAC is actually stronger this year than last year. The MWC and MAC schools need the AAC schools to beat up on each other again this year.

(09-19-2016 09:29 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:32 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 08:21 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:52 PM)fanhood Wrote:  

(09-19-2016 07:30 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  They should SDSU has a better win in beating Cal and a RB that's getting lots of press. That could change Saturday if USF beats FSU I bet you that they jump SDSU in polls and national press.

I agree that if USF beats FSU, USF will jump SDSU in the polls.

I predicted that SDSU would go 12-0 and host Boise in the MWC championship game. I predicted Houston would go 12-0 and get the Auto Bid....but if the Coogs slip up once and it's a 12-0 SDSU vs a 12-0 Boise for all the marbles.....lots of people on here won't like that lol!
Cheers!

I am not going to say that both Boise State and SDSU will be undefeated, as it is a long season and playing on the road in the MW is more challenging than people think. However, if both teams are undefeated, and Houston has lost to Louisville badly, it is very possible that Boise or SDSU is chosen ahead of Houston. If Houston has two losses, it is almost certain that boise or SDSU gets the bid.

I hope that you study up on how the CFP poll works, before the first one comes out in a few weeks. SDSU is at 22 in the AP poll, but you might be completely unranked when the CFP poll comes out in a few weeks; because the CFP polls looks at your league's strength and who you have played. That is why the road for Boise State and SDSU to get the access game is going to be bumpier than the road for the AAC schools. That is why people keep track of conference strength as well as individual schools records.

The AAC is a much stronger league than the MWC. Boise State and SDSU need the AAC teams to beat up on each other in order for Boise State, SDSU and for that matter any MAC team to have a shot at the access game. MWC and MAC schools need to be undefeated AND every AAC team needs to have at least 2 losses in order for the MWC or the MAC champion to have a shot at the access game. If the AAC champion only has one loss then the AAC is going to get the access game; and that is the case even if the MWC has an undefeated champion. Just a couple of years ago neither Marshall of CUSA nor Colorado State of the MWC could pass ECU of the AAC in the CFP poll until ECU had it's usual end of year melt down. Last year Toledo of the MAC could not pass Houston, Memphis, Temple and Navy of the AAC until all the AAC teams started beating up on each other. The AAC is actually stronger this year than last year. The MWC and MAC schools need the AAC schools to beat up on each other again this year.

This "AAC teams are going to 'beat each other up' narrative" is comical. It is the same myth the P5 schools have perpetuated for years. Keep it up, you just might become the next Press Secretary for Obama.

There literally is a sample set of two. The AAC "beat each other up" in 2014 and a 11-2 Boise State team got the bid. Talk to me in 2020 and push the narrative them.

(09-18-2016 11:48 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  As of September 17, 2016, the AAC has pulled away from the other G5's. The MAC is closing ground on the MWC and CUSA is dead last. Aresco's narrative of the AAC being a P6 is looking solid.

1. SEC 38.75
2. Pac 12 42.53
3 Big 10 46.88
4 ACC 50.59
5 Big 12 52.00
6 AAC 64.51
7 FBS Indep 67.16
8 MWC 81.07
9 MAC 84.03
10 Sun Belt 94.97
11 CUSA 96.15

http://masseyratings.com/cf/compare.htm

Massey is useless 3 games into the season. Ex. It has Southern miss ranked ahead of Troy. Troy just beat southern miss on the road. It gives undue weight to a road win over an abisimal Kentucky team for usm. It actually just verifies itself. An idiot could see that the aac is equal to the b12 and maybe the Pac.

Rating conferences this early is ridiculous.