(03-31-2017 04:30 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  This is a terrible idea. Wichita State is one coaching change from being nothing again. The AAC would be better off trying to add New Mexico rather than WS. At least New Mexico brings football, a bowl game, and the entire state of New Mexico.

Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

(03-31-2017 06:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 04:30 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  This is a terrible idea. Wichita State is one coaching change from being nothing again. The AAC would be better off trying to add New Mexico rather than WS. At least New Mexico brings football, a bowl game, and the entire state of New Mexico.

Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

New Mexico isn't the point. It could be Colorado state for all I care. But adding someone like WS is heading back to the past. Your hoping that WS will somehow elevate the AAC. But that's the wrong way to look at it. What the AAC needs to be doing is trying to find a way to hire WS coach, or as many successful coaches as possible.

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 06:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 04:30 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  This is a terrible idea. Wichita State is one coaching change from being nothing again. The AAC would be better off trying to add New Mexico rather than WS. At least New Mexico brings football, a bowl game, and the entire state of New Mexico.

Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

New Mexico isn't the point. It could be Colorado state for all I care. But adding someone like WS is heading back to the past. Your hoping that WS will somehow elevate the AAC. But that's the wrong way to look at it. What the AAC needs to be doing is trying to find a way to hire WS coach, or as many successful coaches as possible.

Unfortunately the only way to hire the Wichita State coach is to spend a lot of money, and the schools with the ability to do that already have really good basketball programs. The other seven or eight programs are a step down in pay and prestige.

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 06:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 04:30 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  This is a terrible idea. Wichita State is one coaching change from being nothing again. The AAC would be better off trying to add New Mexico rather than WS. At least New Mexico brings football, a bowl game, and the entire state of New Mexico.

Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

New Mexico isn't the point. It could be Colorado state for all I care. But adding someone like WS is heading back to the past. Your hoping that WS will somehow elevate the AAC. But that's the wrong way to look at it. What the AAC needs to be doing is trying to find a way to hire WS coach, or as many successful coaches as possible.

The AAC is adding a good basketball program to give it a typical 12/12 basketball/football configuration. I think you might be overthinking it. What we avoided is adding Navy's so-so Olympic sports to get thier football. That's the advantage of the hybrid. I might add, the program we added is the type of program that can hire/attract good coaches. So, we sort of did what you suggest.

(03-31-2017 09:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 06:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 04:30 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  This is a terrible idea. Wichita State is one coaching change from being nothing again. The AAC would be better off trying to add New Mexico rather than WS. At least New Mexico brings football, a bowl game, and the entire state of New Mexico.

Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

New Mexico isn't the point. It could be Colorado state for all I care. But adding someone like WS is heading back to the past. Your hoping that WS will somehow elevate the AAC. But that's the wrong way to look at it. What the AAC needs to be doing is trying to find a way to hire WS coach, or as many successful coaches as possible.

The AAC is adding a good basketball program to give it a typical 12/12 basketball/football configuration. I think you might be overthinking it. What we avoided is adding Navy's so-so Olympic sports to get thier football. That's the advantage of the hybrid. I might add, the program we added is the type of program that can hire/attract good coaches. So, we sort of did what you suggest.

We will simply have to disagree. The Shockers don't have a history of hiring quality coaches. I also don't think that the AAC should have added Navy to begin with.

(03-31-2017 10:10 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 09:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 06:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 04:30 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  This is a terrible idea. Wichita State is one coaching change from being nothing again. The AAC would be better off trying to add New Mexico rather than WS. At least New Mexico brings football, a bowl game, and the entire state of New Mexico.

Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

New Mexico isn't the point. It could be Colorado state for all I care. But adding someone like WS is heading back to the past. Your hoping that WS will somehow elevate the AAC. But that's the wrong way to look at it. What the AAC needs to be doing is trying to find a way to hire WS coach, or as many successful coaches as possible.

The AAC is adding a good basketball program to give it a typical 12/12 basketball/football configuration. I think you might be overthinking it. What we avoided is adding Navy's so-so Olympic sports to get thier football. That's the advantage of the hybrid. I might add, the program we added is the type of program that can hire/attract good coaches. So, we sort of did what you suggest.

We will simply have to disagree. The Shockers don't have a history of hiring quality coaches. I also don't think that the AAC should have added Navy to begin with.

Well to be fair, Navy was added when it still was the Big East and the BCS was still in flux.

(03-31-2017 10:45 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 10:10 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 09:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 06:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

New Mexico isn't the point. It could be Colorado state for all I care. But adding someone like WS is heading back to the past. Your hoping that WS will somehow elevate the AAC. But that's the wrong way to look at it. What the AAC needs to be doing is trying to find a way to hire WS coach, or as many successful coaches as possible.

The AAC is adding a good basketball program to give it a typical 12/12 basketball/football configuration. I think you might be overthinking it. What we avoided is adding Navy's so-so Olympic sports to get thier football. That's the advantage of the hybrid. I might add, the program we added is the type of program that can hire/attract good coaches. So, we sort of did what you suggest.

We will simply have to disagree. The Shockers don't have a history of hiring quality coaches. I also don't think that the AAC should have added Navy to begin with.

Well to be fair, Navy was added when it still was the Big East and the BCS was still in flux.

Uhhh ... no .. that is wrong.

IMHO this was a great move by the AAC. The Shockers have deep pockets and a great coach. Why would Marshall leave now? He has a top15 program, is getting into a stronger conference, makes great money, and is the Mack Daddy of the Shockers.

Have the Shockers ever won the college world series?

(03-31-2017 11:41 PM)Rabonchild Wrote:  IMHO this was a great move by the AAC. The Shockers have deep pockets and a great coach. Why would Marshall leave now? He has a top15 program, is getting into a stronger conference, makes great money, and is the Mack Daddy of the Shockers.

Have the Shockers ever won the college world series?

Wiki says they won in 1989, and have been to seven CWS since their program was restarted in 1978.

(03-31-2017 10:10 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 09:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 06:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 04:30 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  This is a terrible idea. Wichita State is one coaching change from being nothing again. The AAC would be better off trying to add New Mexico rather than WS. At least New Mexico brings football, a bowl game, and the entire state of New Mexico.

Wichita has resources. They average about 10-11K in attendance and currently pay their basketball coach 3.3 million a year. Only a handful of the 350+/- D1 programs pay their coaches that much. As long as they can do that, Wichita will always have a pretty good program. On the other hand, New Mexico has had a good football program once in a blue moon. They have no recruiting area. NM traditionally has a good basketball program, but that football team will be an anchor for any conference where they are member.

New Mexico isn't the point. It could be Colorado state for all I care. But adding someone like WS is heading back to the past. Your hoping that WS will somehow elevate the AAC. But that's the wrong way to look at it. What the AAC needs to be doing is trying to find a way to hire WS coach, or as many successful coaches as possible.

The AAC is adding a good basketball program to give it a typical 12/12 basketball/football configuration. I think you might be overthinking it. What we avoided is adding Navy's so-so Olympic sports to get thier football. That's the advantage of the hybrid. I might add, the program we added is the type of program that can hire/attract good coaches. So, we sort of did what you suggest.

We will simply have to disagree. The Shockers don't have a history of hiring quality coaches. I also don't think that the AAC should have added Navy to begin with.

Disagree in every possible way.

Navy has been a great AAC success. The football conference championship has gone through them. Leaving them out would have been akin to the ACC leaving out Notre Dames partial sports. Their brand is just too tied to the fabric of college football.
Wichita State is an awesome compliment to their membership in the basketball side.
With both, the AAC has two alpha dogs in football and basketball. Those programs deserve the support of playing with likeminded peers.

(03-31-2017 11:30 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 10:45 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Well to be fair, Navy was added when it still was the Big East and the BCS was still in flux.

Uhhh ... no .. that is wrong.

Which part? Because John Marinatto was the commissioner when Navy along with

Houston
SMU
UCF
Boise
San Diego St
Temple

were added in late 2011 or early 2012 in response to West Va, Pitt & Syracuse announcing their departures (and TCU announcing its withdrawal).

We all joined the Big East.

Marinatto resigned in May 2012. The Catholic 7 didn't break off until December 2012.

(04-01-2017 05:39 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 10:10 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 09:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  [quote='Attackcoog' pid='14226836' dateline='1491001649']

Disagree in every possible way.

Navy has been a great AAC success. The football conference championship has gone through them. Leaving them out would have been akin to the ACC leaving out Notre Dames partial sports. Their brand is just too tied to the fabric of college football.
Wichita State is an awesome compliment to their membership in the basketball side.
With both, the AAC has two alpha dogs in football and basketball. Those programs deserve the support of playing with likeminded peers.

Absolutely correct. Navy was a strong FB brand to add to the AAC and Wichita St is a strong MBB brand to add. Very good moves by the conference.

(04-01-2017 08:11 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(04-01-2017 05:39 AM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 10:10 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 09:05 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-31-2017 08:56 PM)hawghiggs Wrote:  [quote='Attackcoog' pid='14226836' dateline='1491001649']

Disagree in every possible way.

Navy has been a great AAC success. The football conference championship has gone through them. Leaving them out would have been akin to the ACC leaving out Notre Dames partial sports. Their brand is just too tied to the fabric of college football.
Wichita State is an awesome compliment to their membership in the basketball side.
With both, the AAC has two alpha dogs in football and basketball. Those programs deserve the support of playing with likeminded peers.

Absolutely correct. Navy was a strong FB brand to add to the AAC and Wichita St is a strong MBB brand to add. Very good moves by the conference.

Yep. Navy is second only to Houston in TV viewers since joining the league. They are a home run.

I think this is great. It's like platooning in baseball: get the best of 2 universities.
Wichita State is a good institutional fit as well

(04-01-2017 09:09 AM)DrBox Wrote:  Wichita State is a good institutional fit as well

That part I'm not sure about. They appear to be about on Memphis' level academically. It's the only drawback as far as I'm concerned.

In other words, about on Houston's level??

Come on, man.

The AAC is a great college sports conference. But other than Tulane, you have no schools with an elite reputation, and other than Cincy, USF, and to a less extent UConn and Temple, you have no major research universities.

Love that Wichita state is coming to aac Such a power move for the aac

Wichita State coming. UConn not going. JMO.

(04-01-2017 09:49 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  In other words, about on Houston's level??

Come on, man.

Other than Tulane, you have no schools with an elite reputation, and other than Cincy, USF, and to a less extent UConn and Temple, you have no major research universities.

Pretty uninformed there, Bison.

I would say the American has several excellent schools

Tulane
Navy
SMU
Tulsa
UConn

All rated Top 35-90 by USNWR. All with average SATs in excess of 1230

And several very good schools

Cincy
USF
UCF
Temple
Houston

All rated Top 118-194 by USNWR. All with average SATs in excess of 1150.

Aside from Navy and private schools Tulane, Tulsa and SMU which don't do a lot of research, the other six schools are ranked Top 72-137 in America by ARWU. Houston, Cincy and South Florida lead the way.

We have two weaker schools who are trying to improve.

Memphis
East Carolina

Both have averages SATs at 1060 or less. Unlike the others, neither is in the Princeton Review Top 381 colleges in America. Neither has a Phi Beta Kappa chapter. Although state schools, neither is ranked by ARWU.

I'd give the edge to ECU since they are ranked 210 by USNWR and Memphis is not ranked.

Wichita State's profile fits with this bottom group. Not ranked by USNWR. Not ranked by ARWU. Not in Princeton Review 381. No Phi Beta Kappa chapter. 1060 average SAT.

(04-01-2017 10:17 AM)TripleA Wrote:  UConn not going. JMO.

The key to keeping UConn (and Cincy) from rejoining the Big East is getting a TV deal that equals or exceeds the Big East deal.

This remains to be seen.