(01-02-2018 01:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(12-30-2017 08:28 PM)Cecil_B_DeMoore Wrote:  

(09-04-2017 09:41 PM)C0|db|00ded Wrote:  When there was talk of us joining either the MWC or the AAC, I personally chose the AAC because I thought of it as a basketball conference and the MWC as a football conference. Of course I knew the AAC played football, but I couldn't have told you which of the two conferences were better at it. All I knew was the MWC sucked at basketball and the AAC had several programs with great traditions.

My momma told me to play to my strengths; it's clear that from a national perspective, the AAC is UCONN, Cincy, WSU, Memphis and SMU with regards to basketball. In football, the AAC blends in with the "best of the rest" category. Now that I've gotten a better grip of college football at the sub-P5 level (P5 being OSU, ND, UA, USC, and one of either OU/UT/UM), it has become pretty evident that teams in this league call it a good year when they attend some random bowl and have one signature win over a mediocre power school to hang their hat on -midmajor ****.

This standard of success will suffice for alumni, students, and local fans, but will not suffice when attempting to build a national reputation and grow conference popularity. Fans on this message board talk like the AAC's goal should be to become another SEC, B12, or B1G, however anybody outside the flood of AAC Kool-Aid knows that this conference's ONLY chance at national prominence is basketball. There is not a single football program in the AAC that has or will move the radar in any meaningful way on the national football landscape from an average fan's perspective - Navy is close for reasons that extend beyond football.

Yes football pays the (football) bills, yes football is important to hundreds of thousands of AAC fans, but at some point you have to wake up and "dance with the one who brought you". The AAC's natural model is clearly the old Big East or ACC. It has no chance of becoming a power football conference on reputation alone a la the SEC. The brand name programs in the AAC are all basketball and they built their reputation on basketball.

Nobody said you can't play football, or even try to be national contenders at it, but the leadership in this conference needs to be marketing the AAC as a basketball/football power conference equally. Basketball is where the AAC's best chance lies for making noise nationally and gaining respect from the media outside of football-centric sports publications. You want to have feature articles written about you on the front page of the New York Times or USA Today sports sections, then you gotta win at a national level like Wichita State, UCONN, or Memphis has done.

Embrace the hardwood, that's where the AAC's path of least resistance lies. Get AAC basketball far beyond Big Pee basketball and I bet football benefits as well. Everybody will be happy. Trying to do it football first will never work. There isn't enough money for another SEC/B1G/P12/B12 conference, but there's plenty of room/money for AAC basketball to promote the conference brand, playing at the highest level for the highest prize... not meaningless, no-name, participation trophy-bowls.


T


...

I didn't even read a word of this post, but what i got out of it is that basketball is the most important sport of this conference and WSU is the best basketball team.

That's what almost all his posts say.

Yeah. Son of Todge

(01-01-2018 05:29 PM)mustangxc Wrote:  

(12-31-2017 12:40 PM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-31-2017 12:18 PM)Downtown Shocker Brown Wrote:  

(12-31-2017 11:52 AM)Underdog Wrote:  

(12-31-2017 09:54 AM)Downtown Shocker Brown Wrote:  I’m curious, in what way does Football drive the bus for AAC teams?

I have been a follower of the USA today articles detailing wxpwnses for Athletic Departments. One thing I have noticed is most schools lose money on football. I am well aware that schools attribute a certain amout of operating expenses to football as they typically produce the most revenue. But I am curious how many AAC schools are making more than $5 mil in profit from Football? It costs a lot of money to play Football, but outside 5 major Football conferences, what schools are actually making money on Football?

I want to preface with this: I am a “Bring back football” to WSU supporter. Not FBS, but every school should have a FB team.

I hope the following answers your question:

“’BC athletic director Gene DeFilippo, who was part of the 12-member ACC expansion committee, adamantly denied that the move was dictated by basketball interests, but he did concede that the effects of it may boost that sport more than football.

‘It had nothing to do with basketball,’ said DeFilippo. ‘It was football money which drove expansion. It was football money and securing our future….

‘We always keep our television partners close to us,’ he said. ‘You don’t get extra money for basketball. It’s 85 percent football money. TV - ESPN - is the one who told us what to do. This was football; it had nothing to do with basketball.’’’

http://www.businessinsider.com/scandal-e...ce-2011-10

If you need further proof that the above is true, just look at the school WS just beat in basketball—UCONN. Moreover, if the networks valued basketball the same as football, there’s no way UCONN would still be in this conference. In addition to this, WS will regret not having a football program when the B12 dismantles this conference in the future. They would take a program with the worst basketball program on the planet but plays FBS before even considering WS.

If you don’t believe football drives FBS realignment, please consider the fact that ECU was given an invite by the Big East (although it was initially a football-only membership) because of its football program that’s supported strongly by its fans. There were other schools which had far better basketball programs that didn’t receive any consideration by the Big East. Heck… they even considered football-only invites for UNLV and Fresno St. to accompany the BSU and SDSU football-only invites. Thus, the networks have conveyed a powerful message to FBS conferences regarding how much more valuable football is over basketball. Consequently, every school in the conference (expect for Navy which could go independent) will continue to ride the football bus together until they either get $$ or die tryin’….

I understand that. But imagine this scenario:

New TV contract negotiations lead to a $20m reduction per team in revenue. Keep in mind ESPN is bleeding right now, having overpaid for a lot of rights that people are using technology to watch for free. They are cutting quality people to lower expenses. Lowering quality of production, etc.

It appears Cincy had the most Athletic Department revenue at rougjly 3 million on 2016. Many AAC schools lost money. What would happen to the AAC Programs if TV rights went way down, instead of up as many people expect? Its clear based on revenue that Football generates a lot. But only UCONN cracks the Top 50 in revenue. Even those in the #50 to #60 range couldnt turn a profit. Is what is being done susstainable even if the TV contracts dont generate more revenue?

Good question…. The short answer is the schools in this conference would stay together regardless of the $ with the anticipation of the dysfunctional B12 imploding. If/when this occurs, many schools would leave even if the $ in the B12 is the same because they won’t risk being left behind. If you don’t believe the schools in this conference would make such a decision, please consider what happened to CUSA when UCONN, UC, and USF picked the conference apart. Schools joined them without knowing how much the rebuilt Big East/American was worth. For the record, WS is in the FBS version of the Big East.

Therefore, regarding the op, this conference was constructed to be a football-first conference—thus the FBS status. However, I will admit that in my opinion, if UCONN, UC, and USF had known the C7 would eventually split, this conference would have been constructed differently by them….

What teams do you think UC, UL, UCONN, Rutgers, USF, and Temple would have added? I think UCF was a no-brainer and Memphis while not initially appealing to them was also a no-brainer. Houston and SMU were very important strategically for recruiting, market, and upside. I think the only possible mistake the conference has made was adding Tulane, Tulsa, and ECU. Navy has proven to be an excellent addition.

Since Louisville and Rutgers were also leaving, you’ll never see me mention them when referring to the schools that were left behind (although I acknowledge that you’ve accurately stated the situation). Regarding your question, I think they would have considered a preemptive strike and added schools that the C7 likely would have considered for expansion. Since the remaining schools still had the “Big East” name, I think that it’s a strong possibility that they could have added those schools—and more. Consequently, the ECU football-only invite might have remained to make room for Butler and Xavier (as an example). Maybe Tulsa also receives a football-only invite to make room for Creighton and possibly Wichita State. Therefore, I see them reconstructing this conference to reflect what it once was: A basketball conference that wants to play FBS….

(01-01-2018 07:55 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The only thing bad about this game is ..... Now I am doubly angry they kept us out of playoff.

Jay Bilas agrees. Tonight on espn he said basketball does it right and football does not. He specifically mentioned UCF and said football should change.

(01-10-2018 12:53 AM)shocker3 Wrote:  

(01-01-2018 07:55 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The only thing bad about this game is ..... Now I am doubly angry they kept us out of playoff.

Jay Bilas agrees. Tonight on espn he said basketball does it right and football does not. He specifically mentioned UCF and said football should change.

Hopefully that will spark a change eventually. I want my huskies title hopes alive and well. Hey, id rather at least have a legitimate shot a it if the perfect season somehow comes together. #wewantbama


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-10-2018 12:53 AM)shocker3 Wrote:  

(01-01-2018 07:55 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  The only thing bad about this game is ..... Now I am doubly angry they kept us out of playoff.

Jay Bilas agrees. Tonight on espn he said basketball does it right and football does not. He specifically mentioned UCF and said football should change.

Man you sound like someone without a football team. http://csnbbs.com/images/smilies/04-rock.gif