(07-25-2018 04:28 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 03:22 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 10:05 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 08:33 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  I'm saying that "tweener" is not a slamdunk invalidation of "P6"
That's kind of the point, actually.

We don't have to transform into the SEC/Big10 overnight or even between now and 2025. P6 doesn't even mean transforming into the BigXII/PAC12. The two key steps on the strategic roadmap are to separate from the G4, and to keep pace/not lose ground to the Autonomy 5.

Tweener does fit. And that doesn't equate to not being P6.

One of the most important requirements to be a power conference is having a true "tentpole" team like Alabama or Oklahoma. So, you can pretty much count on having a national championship contender in most years. All the P5 conferences have that. All have at least one team that ranks in the top 6 over the past ten years or so.

The highest ranked AAC team over that stretch ranks around #50. Talk to me about P6 when you have a team ranked in the top ten over a ten year span. Better yet, when you have at least two in the top 15, like all of the P5 conferences.

Year end rankings, current AAC teams (AP unless otherwise noted; nonAAC/BigEast conf membership noted)
2017 UCF #6, USF #21, Memphis #25
2016 USF #19
2015 Houston #8, Navy #18
2014 Memphis #25 (Coaches')
2013 UCF #10
--------
2012 Cincinnati #22 (Coaches), Tulsa #25 (Coaches, CUSA at that time)
2011 Houston #18 (CUSA, #14 in Coaches), Cincinnati #25
2010 UCF #21, Tulsa #24 (both CUSA
2009 Cincinnati #8
2008 Cincinnati #17


Once again, P6 is not claiming to be the equal of SEC/Big10 today. It's saying don't lump us with the little guys, we're close enough and creditable enough performers to be on the right side of the next big divide.
Didn't hit your metrics - honestly, does EVERY P5? - but one of our twelve teams ranked EVERY year, top 10 five out of ten, and multiple ranked five out of ten. I would say that the fact that there are seven names up there and not just one or two speaks to depth.

"The highest ranked AAC team over that stretch ranks around #50." ??? You might want to adjust your skirt, your unfounded bias is showing.

So I fudged a little when I said "around #50". These are the actual numbers, using the past 11 years (2007 - 2017) of Sagarin power ratings:

51....Cincinnati
53....Houston
54....Navy
55....USF
56....UCF
69....Tulsa
74....Temple
75....ECU
86....UConn
91....Memphis
101..SMU
114..Tulane

And the rankings you show pretty much demonstrate my point. The AAC doesn't have anything close to a tentpole member, much less two. Every P5 does better. That's not bias, my friend. That's just reality.

Ok ken so everyone knows we don’t have a “ tent pole” whoopy frickin doo, what’s your point ?!

The point is that conferences don't get autobids just because they are autonomous, or rich. And they don't get contracts to host an NY6 bowl for those reasons either. They get them because year in and year out their champions are highly ranked due to their performance on the field. Bowls are willing to accept their champion, whoever it is, because history has shown them that their champion will be highly regarded.

But I have argued against autobids for champions - even P5 champions - in those rare cases where the above isn't true. If the ACC champ or the PAC champ in any given year is a four loss team ranked #16 they shouldn't get invited to a playoff. And if the AAC champ and the MWC champ are both highly ranked in the same year, they should both be invited - not just one as is the case now.

(07-25-2018 02:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 11:44 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 10:30 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 09:12 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 09:06 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  I would agree with you, but Texas st is really close to Austin and you will have to figure out how to deal with UT at the capital, being a Houston cougar fan I know all about this problem, good luck, your gonna need it

Obviously we'll never overtake UT or any Texas P5 as a fanbase, but I do think we can carve out a niche better than some schools like Rice, UNT, and SMU and on par with UTSA. I have no idea what UTEPs fanbase is like since they're practically in another state, but I've never met a UTEP fan before. I'd say based on our location alone we are more relevant to most of the state than them, but I'm sure they have a nice local fanbase.

Ha! You can think whatever you want, but do you have some logic to back up that ridiculous statement?

North Texas is the public university to a region larger and more populated then many states. North Texas has been to 3 bowl games in the 5 years we have been in C-USA. The North Texas athletic budget will be around $40 million this season, and we are no where near maxing out our student fee. North Texas is building new facilities and upgrading others for our football program (indoor practice facility, new weight room, new video boards, turf,...). Being in C-USA with 3 other stories Texas programs only strengthens our position.

Rice and SMU are small, but have enough money to remain more relevant then Texas State, especially since both are in more desirable conferences for fans in Texas.

UTEP is like UTSA. They are the only game in town, and their towns are large enough to keep them more relevant then Texas State. They are both in C-USA and have the advantage of conferencing with other respected Texas programs.

Texas State is sandwiched between Austin (UT) and San Antonio (UTSA). There is no logical region to claim as your own or draw a sizable fan base from. Texas State is the only Texas football team in the Sun Belt. That is no fun, and hurts recruiting. Texas State is a big public university, but that is all they have, and it isn't enough. UNT, UTEP, and UTSA are all sizable public universities, and Rice has more money then everyone, including UT. SMU isn't Rice rich, but have far more wealth then Texas State. Texas State is in the least desirable position of all the Texas FBS programs, and they don't have the potential to change the pecking order.

And what has that done for UNTs fanbase? According to that other attendance thread yall have only averaged about 800 more people than us and yall have had some pretty good seasons, we haven't. Imagine once we start winning. Also I seem to remember yall haven't even had a sellout in your new stadium. What's up with that?

In 2017, North Texas averaged 22,362 per game, while Texas State had an average of 17,447. Our current attendance numbers are not great, but they are improving, and we did have average almost 5,000 more fans then Texas State.

Texas State would have tons of potential, if UTSA and Texas were not in your back yard, and there wasn't 11 other FBS programs already in Texas. Face it, Texas State is in a bad spot.

I guess I should've been more clear. I was referencing the other thread about attendance that showed the average over the last 5 seasons. I guess we should go somewhere that doesn't have a river lol. That must be why we've had so few sellouts, but I guess a few is better than none like yall. Besides competing with UTSA for recruits they dont affect us at all.

(07-25-2018 06:02 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 02:01 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 11:44 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 10:30 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-24-2018 09:12 PM)Bobcat2013 Wrote:  Obviously we'll never overtake UT or any Texas P5 as a fanbase, but I do think we can carve out a niche better than some schools like Rice, UNT, and SMU and on par with UTSA. I have no idea what UTEPs fanbase is like since they're practically in another state, but I've never met a UTEP fan before. I'd say based on our location alone we are more relevant to most of the state than them, but I'm sure they have a nice local fanbase.

Ha! You can think whatever you want, but do you have some logic to back up that ridiculous statement?

North Texas is the public university to a region larger and more populated then many states. North Texas has been to 3 bowl games in the 5 years we have been in C-USA. The North Texas athletic budget will be around $40 million this season, and we are no where near maxing out our student fee. North Texas is building new facilities and upgrading others for our football program (indoor practice facility, new weight room, new video boards, turf,...). Being in C-USA with 3 other stories Texas programs only strengthens our position.

Rice and SMU are small, but have enough money to remain more relevant then Texas State, especially since both are in more desirable conferences for fans in Texas.

UTEP is like UTSA. They are the only game in town, and their towns are large enough to keep them more relevant then Texas State. They are both in C-USA and have the advantage of conferencing with other respected Texas programs.

Texas State is sandwiched between Austin (UT) and San Antonio (UTSA). There is no logical region to claim as your own or draw a sizable fan base from. Texas State is the only Texas football team in the Sun Belt. That is no fun, and hurts recruiting. Texas State is a big public university, but that is all they have, and it isn't enough. UNT, UTEP, and UTSA are all sizable public universities, and Rice has more money then everyone, including UT. SMU isn't Rice rich, but have far more wealth then Texas State. Texas State is in the least desirable position of all the Texas FBS programs, and they don't have the potential to change the pecking order.

And what has that done for UNTs fanbase? According to that other attendance thread yall have only averaged about 800 more people than us and yall have had some pretty good seasons, we haven't. Imagine once we start winning. Also I seem to remember yall haven't even had a sellout in your new stadium. What's up with that?

In 2017, North Texas averaged 22,362 per game, while Texas State had an average of 17,447. Our current attendance numbers are not great, but they are improving, and we did have average almost 5,000 more fans then Texas State.

Texas State would have tons of potential, if UTSA and Texas were not in your back yard, and there wasn't 11 other FBS programs already in Texas. Face it, Texas State is in a bad spot.

I guess I should've been more clear. I was referencing the other thread about attendance that showed the average over the last 5 seasons. I guess we should go somewhere that doesn't have a river lol. That must be why we've had so few sellouts, but I guess a few is better than none like yall. Besides competing with UTSA for recruits they dont affect us at all.

This is a big problem. Texas State has to compete with all of the other 11 Texas FBS programs for recruits. And right now, Texas State isn't doing a very good job. UTSA has 2 recruits committed for 2019 that passed on offers from Texas State, and North Texas has 5. So far in the 2019 class, no recruit that has had the choice, has chosen Texas State over either North Texas or UTSA. As of right now, Texas State only has 2 recruits with other FBS offers. Most of your recruits only have FCS offers, or no other offers at all. Texas State is in a bad spot, and it isn't going to change. But, if you choose to ignore reality, you certainly have that right.

Look dude your flat wrong, UTEP, North Texas, Texas state, UTSA are all in the same boat pretty much any way you slice it at this time, anyway this ain’t the right thread for this conversation and Iam the OP, I can start a new thread titled “ short stroke doesn’t like the bobcats” if you like...

(07-25-2018 05:15 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 04:28 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 03:22 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 10:05 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:11 AM)ken d Wrote:  One of the most important requirements to be a power conference is having a true "tentpole" team like Alabama or Oklahoma. So, you can pretty much count on having a national championship contender in most years. All the P5 conferences have that. All have at least one team that ranks in the top 6 over the past ten years or so.

The highest ranked AAC team over that stretch ranks around #50. Talk to me about P6 when you have a team ranked in the top ten over a ten year span. Better yet, when you have at least two in the top 15, like all of the P5 conferences.

Year end rankings, current AAC teams (AP unless otherwise noted; nonAAC/BigEast conf membership noted)
2017 UCF #6, USF #21, Memphis #25
2016 USF #19
2015 Houston #8, Navy #18
2014 Memphis #25 (Coaches')
2013 UCF #10
--------
2012 Cincinnati #22 (Coaches), Tulsa #25 (Coaches, CUSA at that time)
2011 Houston #18 (CUSA, #14 in Coaches), Cincinnati #25
2010 UCF #21, Tulsa #24 (both CUSA
2009 Cincinnati #8
2008 Cincinnati #17


Once again, P6 is not claiming to be the equal of SEC/Big10 today. It's saying don't lump us with the little guys, we're close enough and creditable enough performers to be on the right side of the next big divide.
Didn't hit your metrics - honestly, does EVERY P5? - but one of our twelve teams ranked EVERY year, top 10 five out of ten, and multiple ranked five out of ten. I would say that the fact that there are seven names up there and not just one or two speaks to depth.

"The highest ranked AAC team over that stretch ranks around #50." ??? You might want to adjust your skirt, your unfounded bias is showing.

So I fudged a little when I said "around #50". These are the actual numbers, using the past 11 years (2007 - 2017) of Sagarin power ratings:

51....Cincinnati
53....Houston
54....Navy
55....USF
56....UCF
69....Tulsa
74....Temple
75....ECU
86....UConn
91....Memphis
101..SMU
114..Tulane

And the rankings you show pretty much demonstrate my point. The AAC doesn't have anything close to a tentpole member, much less two. Every P5 does better. That's not bias, my friend. That's just reality.

Ok ken so everyone knows we don’t have a “ tent pole” whoopy frickin doo, what’s your point ?!

The point is that conferences don't get autobids just because they are autonomous, or rich. And they don't get contracts to host an NY6 bowl for those reasons either. They get them because year in and year out their champions are highly ranked due to their performance on the field. Bowls are willing to accept their champion, whoever it is, because history has shown them that their champion will be highly regarded.

But I have argued against autobids for champions - even P5 champions - in those rare cases where the above isn't true. If the ACC champ or the PAC champ in any given year is a four loss team ranked #16 they shouldn't get invited to a playoff. And if the AAC champ and the MWC champ are both highly ranked in the same year, they should both be invited - not just one as is the case now.

It happened once, MW TCU and WAC Boise we’re both undefeated in BCS era, but they rook the easy way out and had them play each other.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(07-25-2018 10:08 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Look dude your flat wrong, UTEP, North Texas, Texas state, UTSA are all in the same boat pretty much any way you slice it at this time, anyway this ain’t the right thread for this conversation and Iam the OP, I can start a new thread titled “ short stroke doesn’t like the bobcats” if you like...

Ha! You've been on this blog about 2 years, and have no mod powers. The Bobcat fan made a ridiculous statement. I have every right to correct it. Just because you agree with his delusion doesn't mean I can't write the truth. Have a nice day.

(07-26-2018 12:54 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 10:08 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  Look dude your flat wrong, UTEP, North Texas, Texas state, UTSA are all in the same boat pretty much any way you slice it at this time, anyway this ain’t the right thread for this conversation and Iam the OP, I can start a new thread titled “ short stroke doesn’t like the bobcats” if you like...

Ha! You've been on this blog about 2 years, and have no mod powers. The Bobcat fan made a ridiculous statement. I have every right to correct it. Just because you agree with his delusion doesn't mean I can't write the truth. Have a nice day.

Just start a new thread... I think it’s an interesting topic