(04-26-2020 02:44 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 10:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  If I failed to make clear in my previous post, my apologies and let me do so now: There are no strong all-sports adds — UMass included. I put UMass on the list because 1. it is a state flagship with 30,000 students, a $350 million endowment (not great but respectable) and a very solid men's hoops program. I understand about the bad football.

Agree with you fully on App State and Marshall wanting ADs to fight for an all-sports invite. But that's not the point. Assuming the American does not want either for all sports, would either be willing to take a football-only invite? I think either might.

As to Dayton, SLU and VCU ... the American has proved it is willing to take a "non-football" option (WSU). Add those three (which I don't foresee happening) and the league's perception in men's hoops takes a major step forward. Most folks on this board (from what I can ascertain) agree with that (but not necessarily that the AAC SHOULD take those three; just that, if it did, hoops would be bolstered). The American has underachieved (and some might argue grossly so) in men's basketball. A shot in the arm would be helfpul.

Again, and as I strongly noted in the post to which you responded:

"The options are limited. I feel the American is going to be forced to add (due to NCAA requirements) so as to maintain two divisions in football (and, as such, not have to play a round-robin schedule). If adding is needed, the schools listed above seem to be the best bets."

By "best bets" I did not mean "great choices." I meant "realistic choices." Some of those realistic choices are "better" than others.

My post was driven by these factors: 1. the NCAA might force the AAC's hand to add; 2. there is not one strong all-sports choice (UAB might be the best and I agree with you on that); 3. the AAC has been a disappointment in men's basketball to date; 4. the choice of a football-only to pair with an "all-sports but football" might be worth considering.

If the AAC cannot stand pat with its currently membership and has to expand so as to maintain the type football arrangement it wants, there is not an ideal scenario for adding schools. Aresco and his team simply have to look at the "as ideal as possible scenario."

And I apologize for my somewhat aggressive tone. It's not always my best side, and please don't be put off by my argumentative nature.

But understand: Witchita State was should be viewed as a one-time-only common-sense solution to having an open spot for basketball. Bringing in any other basketball only schools starts to create an entirely new wing within the conference who have different objectives to what we are trying to achieve as a whole, and additional schools who stand to benefit from football money by way of the conference taking their share of bowl and TV money while at the same time not even fielding a team. That's fine as long as we are 'mid-majors.' The second that changes, that we get greater access to major bowls, CFP, and TV money as we all hope it will, is the second it becomes corrosive and divisive. We have to be aware of the next couple of steps, not just the next one.
There is a reason the Big 10 didn't even bother attempt to just take one schools football team and another's basketball team, or the fact that they took Rutgers and their pile of garbage program as a whole, not ever attempting to splice them up . The SEC wasn't even sure it wanted Mizzou because of it's historically mediocre football and so-so cultural fit. But when these conferences invited them, they did it as a whole, because it's a mistake to do cut them up from the very beginning. FROM. THE. VERY. BEGINNING.
And, well, no - I have to disagree with you again. Adding those 3 basketball schools, as unlikely as you've pointed out it is, doesn't change a damned thing about our basketball perception. It reinforces that we are a desperate conference, begging for attention and respect, and trying to get it by offering anyone and anybody who might bring us an NIT bid. I guarantee you the old Big East schools would look at that and laugh, knowing full well the issues we are going to run into.
The fact that you're right about there being a lack of options cannot force us into making fundamental, irreparable mistakes in membership. Stay the course and build the foundations of our member schools and only bring in schools who share that vision, even if it means getting a somewhat lesser program mixed into that addition.

No worries on the tone. I did not take your message in a negative way. You and I simply see this situation differently.

But, again, I return to this very possible scenario:

1. The NCAA rules such that the AAC MUST add a 12th football school to continue playing only eight conference games and within divisions.

2. Army, Air Force and BYU are not interested in football only. Colorado State is not interested in an all sports invite. The American is not interested in taking three MWC programs for all sports to go to 14 (and, in this case, three MWC programs might not be interested anyway).

So, and with this hypothetical in play, which option would you prefer?:

1. Inviting one of UAB, Georgia State, App State, Marshall, Charlotte, Old Dominion, Buffalo, UMass, Southern Miss, etc., for all sports?

OR

2. Inviting the school with the strongest football program and that would be willing to come as a football only (likely Marshall or App State) and an Olympic sports member such as Dayton, Saint Louis or VCU (or all three to go to 14 members in hoops).

I'm taking choice 2. I realize many disagree with me and respect their right to do so.

(04-26-2020 02:55 PM)BraveKnight Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 01:33 PM)Shox Wrote:  I'm a huge proponent of adding Dayton. Their fan base is similar to that of ours (Wichita) in that they are very comfortable wearing the black hat. Let's be honest, just about every school in this conference wears the same color hat. We are all usually the 2nd or 3rd option in our own states when it comes to loyalty and casual fans. In turn that makes most of us die hards for our program. Let's also be honest and say that UCONN never fit that mold and there fans were never comfortable with it.

For that reason alone Dayton makes the snobs in the Big East very nervous. They are also the single best basketball property available to the AAC. It is a no brainer. The only other black hat type program out there that I can think of is VCU. St. Louis and Davidson have always been wine and cheese type schools very akin to Creighton. They just dont fit the AAC culture wise. The single best thing this conference could do is add the combo of Army/VCU and Dayton/AF. That should be priority one and we should be willing to make whatever concessions necessary to get the academies on board. (Reduced conference schedule, preferential bowl game line ups etc.

Army isn’t coming. Saint Louis hasn’t had as much success as VCU or Dayton but they are a good program in a new media market with a passionate fanbase and within our footprint.

Saint Louis also has a history of sharing a conference with Memphis and Cincinnati and would be a natural rival for Wichita.

(04-26-2020 04:45 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 12:14 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 10:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Lots of strong info in this thread. I'm enjoying reading.

... * the university that would perhaps provide the maximum number of those positives and that would almost certainly take an all-sports invite is UMass (maybe Colorado State). Old Dominion, Buffalo, Charlotte and/or UAB likely would be in the next tier.

????????
How in the world did you get UMass out of that? UMass is what UConn is about to become, at least in football. Literally every other option you listed after them is a better option.

(04-26-2020 10:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  ... * As such, the American needs to consider building upon the hybrid model it currently has. Hartford Husky correctly notes the following in a previous post: "The problem with the "old Big East" was the hoops schools [not being comfortable with being in] the minority.

With all due respect to HH he's wrong. The basketball only schools of the BE were fine with their position as long as they were doing it with football megapower Miami, National Championship contending Va Tech, and other programs going to BCS bowls every year because of the money it brought in. When they realized they were going to have to do that with the likes of SMU, Tulsa, and Tulane, and that the BCS spigot was about to dry up, they bolted and started again. Well, if we ever do achieve CFP level aspirations and paydays, it's going to become an issue again - and this is ABSOLUTELY our goal. If it isn't your schools goal, your name is WSU and there are enough of you.

Even with Miami and VT in the conference, the hoops schools called the shots. That’s why the football schools had to wait so long to even be invited for full membership, except Miami. The AAC just has a completely different dynamic and that was my point. The non football schools would never call the shots in this league and they would be badly outnumbered.

Bingo.

(04-26-2020 08:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 08:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  It’s been my observation that hybrids work fine when everything is going well but as soon as the wheels start to fall off it turns into a hot mess.

If you bring in a non-football school the expectation is that they will earn their keep by being a strong basketball program but what happens if that program starts to falter and they aren’t getting you at large bids or even an NIT presence? You get a lot of bitterness and resentment

Don’t be fooled that you can simply put vote the basketball schools on conference matters. It’s very easy for them to dig in their heels on future membership votes

Let me be as blunt as I can be---ALL conferences do well when everything is going well, but as soon as the wheels start to fall off, they all turn into a hot mess.

Neither the Southwest Conference or the WAC were hybrids. Football schools can find themselves in disagreement with other football playing schools just just as easily as they can with basketball only schools. When Colorado and A&M left the Big12---there werent any "basketball only" schools screwing up the chemistry of the conference. Even in the Big East---football schools left the Big East because they made a hell of a lot more more money in their new destination. Same with the C7---they more than doubled their pay by jumping ship. If SMU leaves the AAC for the Big12---It wont be because they have an issue with Wichita, or potentially a school like VCU, being in the conference.

It is what is it is. The Big East was hybrid when we joined and the AAC was a hybrid from the get go. Hell, the MW is a hybrid conference and so are the ACC and Sunbelt. I would agree its best to use the hybrid judiciously and keep basketball only schools to a small minority---but having 2 or 3 top quality basketball programs to improve the "in conference" schedule strength so our teams dont lose ground during the conference season is a very smart strategy to keep the league strong.

Nobody is leaving the AAC except to go to a P5. If a hybrid "basketball school" leaves---so what? We will be fine. We either dont replace them or we add a team like Dayton. There is zero risk here folks with minimal strategic use of the hybrid. There just isnt. There are no irreplaceable parts in this league. Oddly---in many ways, thats both the leagues biggest strength and its biggest weakness.

Perfectly put, A-Coog.

(04-26-2020 10:46 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  1. Inviting one of UAB, Georgia State, App State, Marshall, Charlotte, Old Dominion, Buffalo, UMass, Southern Miss, etc., for all sports?

OR

2. Inviting the school with the strongest football program and that would be willing to come as a football only (likely Marshall or App State) and an Olympic sports member such as Dayton, Saint Louis or VCU (or all three to go to 14 members in hoops).

I'm taking choice 2. I realize many disagree with me and respect their right to do so.

I mean, it's easy. I pick one.

UAB as an example, has every bit the basketball pedigree of a, say, Dayton, and they bring a football program that is as competitive as Marshall's or App States. Honestly, there isn't even that much difference in these football or basketball programs - you've pointed this out, at least partially, by saying that there are no 'good' options, something I agree with.

But more to the point, there is going to be less politics as a result and gives us a better chance to survive and thrive. There has the chance for more unity, less financial fighting, and a shared vision. We require this.

Option 2 screams half-a$$ed and lost as a confernence, and is a 'fans choice,' as you put it. No reasonable AD or president would want this if they have half a clue.

(04-26-2020 05:53 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 04:45 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 12:14 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 10:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Lots of strong info in this thread. I'm enjoying reading.

... * the university that would perhaps provide the maximum number of those positives and that would almost certainly take an all-sports invite is UMass (maybe Colorado State). Old Dominion, Buffalo, Charlotte and/or UAB likely would be in the next tier.

????????
How in the world did you get UMass out of that? UMass is what UConn is about to become, at least in football. Literally every other option you listed after them is a better option.

(04-26-2020 10:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  ... * As such, the American needs to consider building upon the hybrid model it currently has. Hartford Husky correctly notes the following in a previous post: "The problem with the "old Big East" was the hoops schools [not being comfortable with being in] the minority.

With all due respect to HH he's wrong. The basketball only schools of the BE were fine with their position as long as they were doing it with football megapower Miami, National Championship contending Va Tech, and other programs going to BCS bowls every year because of the money it brought in. When they realized they were going to have to do that with the likes of SMU, Tulsa, and Tulane, and that the BCS spigot was about to dry up, they bolted and started again. Well, if we ever do achieve CFP level aspirations and paydays, it's going to become an issue again - and this is ABSOLUTELY our goal. If it isn't your schools goal, your name is WSU and there are enough of you.

Even with Miami and VT in the conference, the hoops schools called the shots. That’s why the football schools had to wait so long to even be invited for full membership, except Miami. The AAC just has a completely different dynamic and that was my point. The non football schools would never call the shots in this league and they would be badly outnumbered.

Yeah, that's what I figured. The basketball schools ran the show and it was the football schools that got pi$$ed off and all left, one by one.
But while I agree that basketball schools will never run the conference it still doesn't stop them from getting a backdoor share of some of that football money. That's gonna upset people, bigtime.
And, again, start bringing in basketball schools and over time and realignment they will start to vote as a block and start to weld more power. and then we have problems.

The AAC already has problems and one is a lack of positive national perception for its men's basketball. The league is losing UConn. Those on this board who are negative toward UConn can spin it anyway they want to make the loss seem like "no big deal", but the reality remains — the league is losing what most reasonable and fair-minded folks would contend is its top men's basketball brand (UConn).

IF (and I don't see it happening) the American were bold and invited Dayton, Saint Louis and VCU, I would almost certainly think the three would come. Some skeptics might argue, say, one of the three might be less than ready to accept. So, let's say, for example, that Dayton is hesitant. I would think it would still accept the invite for concern of (again, for example) the American taking some other A10 program to go with VCU and SLU. So, and in this case, Dayton by not accepting would risk being left behind in an A10 that is losing VCU, Saint Louis and, say, UMass (for perhaps all sports but football) or Davidson. That's a wounded A10 that Dayton might not want to be a part of. Dayton comes with VCU and SLU, as I see it.

If the American were to land VCU, Dayton and Saint Louis to go with its current seven all-time Top 75 to 100 programs (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, SMU, Temple, Tulsa and Wichita), that's 10 all-time top 100 programs. Get App State for football only and it's still only four non-football to 12 football.

Dayton has a strong history and tremendous fan base. It has shared a league with Memphis and Cincy. The Flyers would bring an instant, and heated, rivalry with Cincy in the American. A 2015 Wall Street Journal study of college basketball team valuations ranked Dayton No. 23 nationally with 2014 adjusted revenues in excess of $16.6 million (highest for non-football conference programs) and a valuation of nearly $84 million — second highest for non-football conference programs and higher than programs such as Florida, Texas, and Michigan).

SLU is located in a big city fairly near Wichita, Tulsa, Memphis and Cincy. It has an endowment of $1.2 billion and shared a league (the Metro) with Memphis, Cincy, South Florida and Tulane. The Billikens have had some nationally known coaches and good teams.

VCU was once in the Metro with South Florida and Tulane. It offers a strong fan base and good-sized city (Richmond). VCU is nationally known due to Final Four and quality coaches (Shaka Smart, Will Wade, Sonny Smith, Jeff Capel and Anthony Grant). Of note, in 2017, VCU was ranked the 40th most valuable men's basketball program in the country by The Wall Street Journal, with a valuation of almost $57 million.

That a strong 14 for hoops (potentially, and likely, better than when the AAC had 12 with UConn) and a strong 12 in football and, with App State or Marshall in this hypothetical, clearly better than with UConn football.

As many posters have noted, there are hybrids elsewhere. Notre Dame does not play a full slate of football games in the ACC. UConn will have the only DI football program of Big East members. Hawaii is football only in the Mountain West. The hybrid can be done (as it currently is doing rather well in the American with Navy and WSU).

The American is not the SEC or Big Ten, which have the luxury of not needing a hybrid model. It has to "think outside the box."

The AAC's goal is to be as good in as many areas (academic prestige, football, men's and women's hoops, baseball, endowments, overall budgets, fan bases, locations of schools, etc.) as possible. If the league is able to stay put with the 12 schools it has, so be it. But if it must expand for football purposes, which I feel is likely, a furthering of the hybrid should not automatically be ruled out.

(04-26-2020 10:53 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 08:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 08:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  It’s been my observation that hybrids work fine when everything is going well but as soon as the wheels start to fall off it turns into a hot mess.

If you bring in a non-football school the expectation is that they will earn their keep by being a strong basketball program but what happens if that program starts to falter and they aren’t getting you at large bids or even an NIT presence? You get a lot of bitterness and resentment

Don’t be fooled that you can simply put vote the basketball schools on conference matters. It’s very easy for them to dig in their heels on future membership votes

Let me be as blunt as I can be---ALL conferences do well when everything is going well, but as soon as the wheels start to fall off, they all turn into a hot mess.

Neither the Southwest Conference or the WAC were hybrids. Football schools can find themselves in disagreement with other football playing schools just just as easily as they can with basketball only schools. When Colorado and A&M left the Big12---there werent any "basketball only" schools screwing up the chemistry of the conference. Even in the Big East---football schools left the Big East because they made a hell of a lot more more money in their new destination. Same with the C7---they more than doubled their pay by jumping ship. If SMU leaves the AAC for the Big12---It wont be because they have an issue with Wichita, or potentially a school like VCU, being in the conference.

It is what is it is. The Big East was hybrid when we joined and the AAC was a hybrid from the get go. Hell, the MW is a hybrid conference and so are the ACC and Sunbelt. I would agree its best to use the hybrid judiciously and keep basketball only schools to a small minority---but having 2 or 3 top quality basketball programs to improve the "in conference" schedule strength so our teams dont lose ground during the conference season is a very smart strategy to keep the league strong.

Nobody is leaving the AAC except to go to a P5. If a hybrid "basketball school" leaves---so what? We will be fine. We either dont replace them or we add a team like Dayton. There is zero risk here folks with minimal strategic use of the hybrid. There just isnt. There are no irreplaceable parts in this league. Oddly---in many ways, thats both the leagues biggest strength and its biggest weakness.

Perfectly put, A-Coog.

You kidding? That's BS and Attackcoog knows it.

The SWC became a group of entitled, good ole' boy cheaters who lacked vision and got lazy when it came to actually building a conference and then turned on each other and imploded like a dying star - you can still see it in UT vs. A&M pettiness. The SWC has almost nothing in common with the Big East, and the WAC?? The WAC was mid-major to begin with. Comparing the likes of UTEP and Wyoming to Georgetown and Syracuse is laughable.

Let's be clear here - The AAC isn't a hybrid. It had one football only school in its inception and added a basketball only school as a one-time addition to fill a hole - it can stop there. The Big East, from it's inception, had a football faction vs. a basketball faction - the Requiem for the Big East points that out. It took thirty years for those issues to come to a head, but they did and I don't want a repeat of it.

And lastly, the basketball schools aren't going to leave, because the football money/additional exposure/etc. is going to keep them there - THAT'S THE GD PROBLEM. You think the football schools from the old BE would have had a problem with Seton Hall or Providence leaving? Of course not. Christ, the founding members, all basketball schools, left and did we replace them? HELL NO. BUT THE SECOND A FOOTBALL PROGRAM LEFT AND IT'S REVENUE WITH THEM THE BIG EAST WENT OUT AND FOUND WHATEVER REPLACEMENT THEY COULD - happened two or three times.

Rather, they will dig their heals in, as Muskie pointed out and vote to hang onto the football money - their own basketball programs benefits from this.

Some of ya'll really need to get some vision.

(04-26-2020 11:10 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 10:46 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  1. Inviting one of UAB, Georgia State, App State, Marshall, Charlotte, Old Dominion, Buffalo, UMass, Southern Miss, etc., for all sports?

OR

2. Inviting the school with the strongest football program and that would be willing to come as a football only (likely Marshall or App State) and an Olympic sports member such as Dayton, Saint Louis or VCU (or all three to go to 14 members in hoops).

I'm taking choice 2. I realize many disagree with me and respect their right to do so.

I mean, it's easy. I pick one.

UAB as an example, has every bit the basketball pedigree of a, say, Dayton, and they bring a football program that is as competitive as Marshall's or App States. Honestly, there isn't even that much difference in these football or basketball programs - you've pointed this out, at least partially, by saying that there are no 'good' options, something I agree with.

But more to the point, there is going to be less politics as a result and gives us a better chance to survive and thrive. There has the chance for more unity, less financial fighting, and a shared vision. We require this.

Option 2 screams half-a$$ed and lost as a confernence, and is a 'fans choice,' as you put it. No reasonable AD or president would want this if they have half a clue.

I would be OK with the American adding UAB for all-sports and then calling it a day. That's a quality all-around sports program and a fine university (with a medical school, no less) in a cool city. I was a huge fan of Gene Bartow back in the day. UAB is qualified for American membership. I agree with you on that.

But for you to contend that UAB has "every bit the basketball pedigree of Dayton" ... that's a headscratcher. Even if UAB had fielded a men's basketball program since the turn of the 20th century (like UD), had played in national title game (like UD), had played in three Elite Eights, had five NIT runner-ups and two NIT titles, and was valued monetarily (see my previous post) as highly as Dayton, it could never average 13,000 fans per home game like Dayton did this year. That rabid fan base alone gives UD a major edge. The Flyer program is highly respected on a national level. It could easily be a target of the Big East at some point soon.

In men's basketball, Dayton is more like Duke than UAB is like Dayton.

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 05:53 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 04:45 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 12:14 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 10:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  Lots of strong info in this thread. I'm enjoying reading.

... * the university that would perhaps provide the maximum number of those positives and that would almost certainly take an all-sports invite is UMass (maybe Colorado State). Old Dominion, Buffalo, Charlotte and/or UAB likely would be in the next tier.

????????
How in the world did you get UMass out of that? UMass is what UConn is about to become, at least in football. Literally every other option you listed after them is a better option.

(04-26-2020 10:08 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  ... * As such, the American needs to consider building upon the hybrid model it currently has. Hartford Husky correctly notes the following in a previous post: "The problem with the "old Big East" was the hoops schools [not being comfortable with being in] the minority.

With all due respect to HH he's wrong. The basketball only schools of the BE were fine with their position as long as they were doing it with football megapower Miami, National Championship contending Va Tech, and other programs going to BCS bowls every year because of the money it brought in. When they realized they were going to have to do that with the likes of SMU, Tulsa, and Tulane, and that the BCS spigot was about to dry up, they bolted and started again. Well, if we ever do achieve CFP level aspirations and paydays, it's going to become an issue again - and this is ABSOLUTELY our goal. If it isn't your schools goal, your name is WSU and there are enough of you.

Even with Miami and VT in the conference, the hoops schools called the shots. That’s why the football schools had to wait so long to even be invited for full membership, except Miami. The AAC just has a completely different dynamic and that was my point. The non football schools would never call the shots in this league and they would be badly outnumbered.

Yeah, that's what I figured. The basketball schools ran the show and it was the football schools that got pi$$ed off and all left, one by one.
But while I agree that basketball schools will never run the conference it still doesn't stop them from getting a backdoor share of some of that football money. That's gonna upset people, bigtime.
And, again, start bringing in basketball schools and over time and realignment they will start to vote as a block and start to weld more power. and then we have problems.

The AAC already has problems and one is a lack of positive national perception for its men's basketball. The league is losing UConn. Those on this board who are negative toward UConn can spin it anyway they want to make the loss seem like "no big deal", but the reality remains — the league is losing what most reasonable and fair-minded folks would contend is its top men's basketball brand (UConn).

IF (and I don't see it happening) the American were bold and invited Dayton, Saint Louis and VCU, I would almost certainly think the three would come. Some skeptics might argue, say, one of the three might be less than ready to accept. So, let's say, for example, that Dayton is hesitant. I would think it would still accept the invite for concern of (again, for example) the American taking some other A10 program to go with VCU and SLU. So, and in this case, Dayton by not accepting would risk being left behind in an A10 that is losing VCU, Saint Louis and, say, UMass (for perhaps all sports but football) or Davidson. That's a wounded A10 that Dayton might not want to be a part of. Dayton comes with VCU and SLU, as I see it.

If the American were to land VCU, Dayton and Saint Louis to go with its current seven all-time Top 75 to 100 programs (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, SMU, Temple, Tulsa and Wichita), that's 10 all-time top 100 programs. Get App State for football only and it's still only four non-football to 12 football.

Dayton has a strong history and tremendous fan base. It has shared a league with Memphis and Cincy. The Flyers would bring an instant, and heated, rivalry with Cincy in the American. A 2015 Wall Street Journal study of college basketball team valuations ranked Dayton No. 23 nationally with 2014 adjusted revenues in excess of $16.6 million (highest for non-football conference programs) and a valuation of nearly $84 million — second highest for non-football conference programs and higher than programs such as Florida, Texas, and Michigan).

SLU is located in a big city fairly near Wichita, Tulsa, Memphis and Cincy. It has an endowment of $1.2 billion and shared a league (the Metro) with Memphis, Cincy, South Florida and Tulane. The Billikens have had some nationally known coaches and good teams.

VCU was once in the Metro with South Florida and Tulane. It offers a strong fan base and good-sized city (Richmond). VCU is nationally known due to Final Four and quality coaches (Shaka Smart, Will Wade, Sonny Smith, Jeff Capel and Anthony Grant). Of note, in 2017, VCU was ranked the 40th most valuable men's basketball program in the country by The Wall Street Journal, with a valuation of almost $57 million.

That a strong 14 for hoops (potentially, and likely, better than when the AAC had 12 with UConn) and a strong 12 in football and, with App State or Marshall in this hypothetical, clearly better than with UConn football.

As many posters have noted, there are hybrids elsewhere. Notre Dame does not play a full slate of football games in the ACC. UConn will have the only DI football program of Big East members. Hawaii is football only in the Mountain West. The hybrid can be done (as it currently is doing rather well in the American with Navy and WSU).

The American is not the SEC or Big Ten, which have the luxury of not needing a hybrid model. It has to "think outside the box."

The AAC's goal is to be as good in as many areas (academic prestige, football, men's and women's hoops, baseball, endowments, overall budgets, fan bases, locations of schools, etc.) as possible. If the league is able to stay put with the 12 schools it has, so be it. But if it must expand for football purposes, which I feel is likely, a furthering of the hybrid should not automatically be ruled out.

St Louis brings nothing. I'm not sure why you are caught up on them. Hell Murray State would bring a better fan base and pedigree than the stuck up Billikins. If we're trying to build a tier one basketball conference, you need to bring in high level programs. The only ones currently out there that would come actually move to the AAC are Dayton and VCU. That's it, there are no other worthy adds.

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The AAC already has problems and one is a lack of positive national perception for its men's basketball. The league is losing UConn. Those on this board who are negative toward UConn can spin it anyway they want to make the loss seem like "no big deal", but the reality remains — the league is losing what most reasonable and fair-minded folks would contend is its top men's basketball brand (UConn).

This is true. It's also entirely irrelevant. Hell, people are cheering many believe the loss of the football program negates the loss of their basketball program. Basketball fans are mourning, and I understand this, but it's not a massive loss revenue, or a threat to league stability but rather many are treating as a genuine opportunity - that should tell you something.

UConn won a national championship and is leaving.
Syracuse won a national championship while in the BE and basically the day afterwards tried to walk out the door with Miami and BC.
Meanwhile, UCF was invited to the BE before Memphis, or Tulsa, or Dayton, Butler, Marquette, etc.
Basketball doesn't matter in conference building and we need to acknowledge this.

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  As many posters have noted, there are hybrids elsewhere. Notre Dame does not play a full slate of football games in the ACC. UConn will have the only DI football program of Big East members. Hawaii is football only in the Mountain West. The hybrid can be done (as it currently is doing rather well in the American with Navy and WSU).

No, these are not hybrids. This is Notre Dame showing it's influence and power to get a sweatheart deal with a major conference because they can, just like Navy could with us. Hawaii and UConn are on the other ends of the spectrum - they're desparate, and I'm not kidding. One school exceptions are not genuine BE large group hybrid dynamics with genuine philosophical disagreements, and it's intentionally disingenuous to sell them as such.

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The AAC's goal is to be as good in as many areas (academic prestige, football, men's and women's hoops, baseball, endowments, overall budgets, fan bases, locations of schools, etc.) as possible. If the league is able to stay put with the 12 schools it has, so be it. But if it must expand for football purposes, which I feel is likely, a furthering of the hybrid should not automatically be ruled out.

Yes, it is. Only we have to prioritize if we actually want to survive, and football matters and basketball doesn't.
We need to nix any talk of a burgeoning hybrid talk as soon as possible because it is open stupidity and short-sighted.

One cool thing about adding St. Louis is that going to St. Louis would be cool for viewership. Unfortunately, I don't think St. Louis can be a productive team consistently year in and year out. I also believe they aren't ready to be in the American as Dayton, UAB (all sports), and perhaps VCU. For that reasons, I'm out on them. Also, whoever said UMASS, let's stop with the Minutemen. We will absolutely be better off adding App. St than Massachusetts.

(04-26-2020 11:55 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  But for you to contend that UAB has "every bit the basketball pedigree of Dayton" ... that's a headscratcher. Even if UAB had fielded a men's basketball program since the turn of the 20th century (like UD), had played in national title game (like UD), had played in three Elite Eights, had five NIT runner-ups and two NIT titles, and was valued monetarily (see my previous post) as highly as Dayton, it could never average 13,000 fans per home game like Dayton did this year. That rabid fan base alone gives UD a major edge. The Flyer program is highly respected on a national level. It could easily be a target of the Big East at some point soon.

In men's basketball, Dayton is more like Duke than UAB is like Dayton.

Yeah, no, Dayton’s prehistoric basketball record is irrelevant here.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to nitpick over this - if it makes you feel better to say that Dayton is somehow relevant in modern basketball, than go ahead - I say UAB is more relevant to anyone not wearing a toupe and a pacemaker, but whatever. It's Irrelevant.

But if you think that adding them to this conference somehow makes this a better conference, then you have lost all sight of what Aresco and the ACTUAL SCHOOLS are looking for.

Using this approach is a total retreat back to the old Big East mentality that lead to schools to smile to each others face and then get on the phone with the ACC, begging to be let in. And again, nobody has an answer to how to keep the basketball schools out of the football schools pockets.

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 10:53 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 08:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 08:15 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  It’s been my observation that hybrids work fine when everything is going well but as soon as the wheels start to fall off it turns into a hot mess.

If you bring in a non-football school the expectation is that they will earn their keep by being a strong basketball program but what happens if that program starts to falter and they aren’t getting you at large bids or even an NIT presence? You get a lot of bitterness and resentment

Don’t be fooled that you can simply put vote the basketball schools on conference matters. It’s very easy for them to dig in their heels on future membership votes

Let me be as blunt as I can be---ALL conferences do well when everything is going well, but as soon as the wheels start to fall off, they all turn into a hot mess.

Neither the Southwest Conference or the WAC were hybrids. Football schools can find themselves in disagreement with other football playing schools just just as easily as they can with basketball only schools. When Colorado and A&M left the Big12---there werent any "basketball only" schools screwing up the chemistry of the conference. Even in the Big East---football schools left the Big East because they made a hell of a lot more more money in their new destination. Same with the C7---they more than doubled their pay by jumping ship. If SMU leaves the AAC for the Big12---It wont be because they have an issue with Wichita, or potentially a school like VCU, being in the conference.

It is what is it is. The Big East was hybrid when we joined and the AAC was a hybrid from the get go. Hell, the MW is a hybrid conference and so are the ACC and Sunbelt. I would agree its best to use the hybrid judiciously and keep basketball only schools to a small minority---but having 2 or 3 top quality basketball programs to improve the "in conference" schedule strength so our teams dont lose ground during the conference season is a very smart strategy to keep the league strong.

Nobody is leaving the AAC except to go to a P5. If a hybrid "basketball school" leaves---so what? We will be fine. We either dont replace them or we add a team like Dayton. There is zero risk here folks with minimal strategic use of the hybrid. There just isnt. There are no irreplaceable parts in this league. Oddly---in many ways, thats both the leagues biggest strength and its biggest weakness.

Perfectly put, A-Coog.

You kidding? That's BS and Attackcoog knows it.

The SWC became a group of entitled, good ole' boy cheaters who lacked vision and got lazy when it came to actually building a conference and then turned on each other and imploded like a dying star - you can still see it in UT vs. A&M pettiness. The SWC has almost nothing in common with the Big East, and the WAC?? The WAC was mid-major to begin with. Comparing the likes of UTEP and Wyoming to Georgetown and Syracuse is laughable.

Let's be clear here - The AAC isn't a hybrid. It had one football only school in its inception and added a basketball only school as a one-time addition to fill a hole - it can stop there. The Big East, from it's inception, had a football faction vs. a basketball faction - the Requiem for the Big East points that out. It took thirty years for those issues to come to a head, but they did and I don't want a repeat of it.

And lastly, the basketball schools aren't going to leave, because the football money/additional exposure/etc. is going to keep them there - THAT'S THE GD PROBLEM. You think the football schools from the old BE would have had a problem with Seton Hall or Providence leaving? Of course not. Christ, the founding members, all basketball schools, left and did we replace them? HELL NO. BUT THE SECOND A FOOTBALL PROGRAM LEFT AND IT'S REVENUE WITH THEM THE BIG EAST WENT OUT AND FOUND WHATEVER REPLACEMENT THEY COULD - happened two or three times.

Rather, they will dig their heals in, as Muskie pointed out and vote to hang onto the football money - their own basketball programs benefits from this.

Some of ya'll really need to get some vision.

Swing and miss. You couldnt have missed the point worse had you tried. What you said wasnt really wrong---It's more like what you were saying really just hammers home my point. The whole basketball school vs football schools thing doesnt matter in the AAC. Yes---it did cause a fissure for those particular Big East schools in the context of their particular circumstances. You seem to understand that as you correctly pointed out that the SWC failed for a completely different set of causes. Likewise, the Big East experience has no more bearing on how this AAC group of schools would work with a couple of extra hybrid members than the implosion of the SWC. THAT was the entire point. In other words----A football/basketball fissure causing collapse in a hybrid conference is no more inevitable than the expectation that every non-hybrid conference will inevitably collapse due to "schools getting lazy".

The Big East was the Big East. We are not the Big East. We dont have 7 perfectly compatible Catholic private basketball schools in close proximity who only want to play each other---and have always only wanted to play each other (but got side tracked due to chasing money). Adding one or two more basketball schools to the AAC wont replicate the Big East circumstances. We arent going to have the same issues as the Big East any more than we would have the same issues as the SWC or WAC. The often cited hybrid concern is little more than misplaced fear. There is simply no sound basis for the assumption that because it happened once to the Big East (under completely different circumstances)----then 12 completely different schools inevitably will suffer the exact same fate if they have more than one non-football schools. Its a lazy thought process completely devoid of any serious analysis of the differences between the two memberships based on a single example (which actually worked very well for 30 years before it did finally fail).

(04-24-2020 02:02 PM)Knightrogen Wrote:  I am watching Requiem Of the Big East on Youtube today and had this idea: Why couldn't American build something like the Old Big East?

We have a group of schools that are playing very well: Houston, Memphis, Cincy, Tulsa and Wichita State. American schools have one thing in common, we are (almost) all located in big markets.

Houston
Memphis
Cincinnati
Orlando
Tampa
New Orleans
Philedelphia
Dallas

That was how the Old Big East was formed in the early 80s, big TV Markets and they all have something in common that they want to play Basketball at a higher level.

Many of our schools have a great pedigree in Basketball also.
============================================


Houston: Phi Slamma Jamma; Two-time NCAA Tournament Finalists

NCAA Tournament Runner-up
1983, 1984
NCAA Tournament Final Four
1967, 1968, 1982, 1983, 1984
NCAA Tournament Elite Eight
1967, 1968, 1982, 1983, 1984
NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen
1956, 1961, 1965, 1967, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1982, 1983, 1984, 2019
NCAA Tournament Round of 32
1956, 1961, 1965, 1967, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1982, 1983, 1984, 2018, 2019
NCAA Tournament Appearances
1956, 1961, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1978, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1987, 1990, 1992, 2010, 2018, 2019
Conference Tournament Champions
1978, 1981, 1983, 1984, 1992, 2010
Conference Regular Season Champions
1946, 1947, 1950, 1956, 1983, 1984, 1992, 2019, 2020


============================================


Memphis: Two-time NCAA Tournament Finalists

NCAA Tournament Runner-up
1973, 2008
NCAA Tournament Final Four
1973, 1985, 2008
NCAA Tournament Elite Eight
1973, 1985, 1992, 2006, 2007, 2008
NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen
1973, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1992, 1995, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009
NCAA Tournament Round of 32
1973, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1992, 1995, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2013, 2014
NCAA Tournament Appearances
1955, 1956, 1962, 1973, 1976, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
Conference Tournament Champions
1982, 1984, 1985, 1987, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013
Conference Regular Season Champions
1972, 1973, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1995, 1996, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008*, 2009, 2012, 2013

============================================


Temple: John Chaney era (also James Usilton & Harry Litwack eras) 1938 Nat'l Championship; Won NCAA National Third Place Game in 1956 and 1958.

Temple Owls

1938 National Championship by virtue of winning the inaugural NIT Tournament

Pre-tournament Premo-Porretta Champions
1938
Pre-tournament Helms Champions
1938
NCAA Tournament Final Four
1956, 1958
NCAA Tournament Elite Eight
1944, 1956, 1958, 1988, 1991, 1993, 1999, 2001
NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen
1956, 1958, 1988, 1991, 1993, 1999, 2001
NCAA Tournament Round of 32
1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2011, 2013
NCAA Tournament Appearances
1944, 1956, 1958, 1964, 1967, 1970, 1972, 1979, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2016, 2019
Conference Tournament Champions
1985, 1987, 1988, 1990, 2000, 2001, 2008, 2009, 2010
Conference Regular Season Champions
1937, 1938, 1964, 1967, 1969, 1972, 1977, 1979, 1982, 1984, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2010, 2012, 2016

============================================


Cincinnati (1961 & 1962 NCAA Champions; 1963 runner-up)


NCAA Tournament Champions
1961, 1962
NCAA Tournament Runner-up
1963
NCAA Tournament Final Four
1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1992
NCAA Tournament Elite Eight
1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1992, 1993, 1996
NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen
1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1966, 1975, 1992, 1993, 1996, 2001, 2012
NCAA Tournament Round of 32
1975, 1992, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2005, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2017, 2018
NCAA Tournament Appearances
1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1966, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019
Conference Tournament Champions
1976, 1977, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1998, 2002, 2004, 2018, 2019
Conference Regular Season Champions
1926, 1928, 1929, 1930, 1947, 1948, 1949, 1950, 1951, 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1966, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2004, 2014, 2018, 2020

============================================

For heaven's sake, don't leave out Wichita State!


NCAA Tournament Final Four
1965, 2013
NCAA Tournament Elite Eight
1964, 1965, 1981, 2013
NCAA Tournament Sweet Sixteen
1964, 1965, 1981, 2006, 2013, 2015
NCAA Tournament Round of 32
1981, 2006, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017
NCAA Tournament Appearances
1964, 1965, 1976, 1981, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2006, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018
Conference Tournament Champions
1985, 1987, 2014, 2017
Conference Regular Season Champions
1921, 1933, 1964, 1965, 1976, 1981, 1983, 2006, 2012, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017

============================================

This past year, we could had 3 bids to the NCAA tournament. Is it our schedule that prevents us from having more at-large bids? But we are a pretty darn good Basketball Conference. Look at Big 10 which they had 7 or 8 at large bids. Is it all because of our Strength of Schedule in Non-Conference play?

But on a program level, I can personally see the rise of American Basketball because of the coaches we have in this league and that was how the Old Big East did in the 80s and 90s with their great charismatic coaches:
Kelvin Sampson
Gregg Marshall
Ron Hunter
Frank Haith
Johnny Dawkins
Brian Gregory
and more.
[b]
Should we expand Basketball-Only invites to VCU and Dayton? [/b]

Absolutely. Invite VCU and Dayton. Good idea!

Mike Aresco: I hope you're reading this!


============================================

(04-27-2020 12:02 AM)Shox Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 05:53 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 04:45 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 12:14 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  ????????
How in the world did you get UMass out of that? UMass is what UConn is about to become, at least in football. Literally every other option you listed after them is a better option.


With all due respect to HH he's wrong. The basketball only schools of the BE were fine with their position as long as they were doing it with football megapower Miami, National Championship contending Va Tech, and other programs going to BCS bowls every year because of the money it brought in. When they realized they were going to have to do that with the likes of SMU, Tulsa, and Tulane, and that the BCS spigot was about to dry up, they bolted and started again. Well, if we ever do achieve CFP level aspirations and paydays, it's going to become an issue again - and this is ABSOLUTELY our goal. If it isn't your schools goal, your name is WSU and there are enough of you.

Even with Miami and VT in the conference, the hoops schools called the shots. That’s why the football schools had to wait so long to even be invited for full membership, except Miami. The AAC just has a completely different dynamic and that was my point. The non football schools would never call the shots in this league and they would be badly outnumbered.

Yeah, that's what I figured. The basketball schools ran the show and it was the football schools that got pi$$ed off and all left, one by one.
But while I agree that basketball schools will never run the conference it still doesn't stop them from getting a backdoor share of some of that football money. That's gonna upset people, bigtime.
And, again, start bringing in basketball schools and over time and realignment they will start to vote as a block and start to weld more power. and then we have problems.

The AAC already has problems and one is a lack of positive national perception for its men's basketball. The league is losing UConn. Those on this board who are negative toward UConn can spin it anyway they want to make the loss seem like "no big deal", but the reality remains — the league is losing what most reasonable and fair-minded folks would contend is its top men's basketball brand (UConn).

IF (and I don't see it happening) the American were bold and invited Dayton, Saint Louis and VCU, I would almost certainly think the three would come. Some skeptics might argue, say, one of the three might be less than ready to accept. So, let's say, for example, that Dayton is hesitant. I would think it would still accept the invite for concern of (again, for example) the American taking some other A10 program to go with VCU and SLU. So, and in this case, Dayton by not accepting would risk being left behind in an A10 that is losing VCU, Saint Louis and, say, UMass (for perhaps all sports but football) or Davidson. That's a wounded A10 that Dayton might not want to be a part of. Dayton comes with VCU and SLU, as I see it.

If the American were to land VCU, Dayton and Saint Louis to go with its current seven all-time Top 75 to 100 programs (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, SMU, Temple, Tulsa and Wichita), that's 10 all-time top 100 programs. Get App State for football only and it's still only four non-football to 12 football.

Dayton has a strong history and tremendous fan base. It has shared a league with Memphis and Cincy. The Flyers would bring an instant, and heated, rivalry with Cincy in the American. A 2015 Wall Street Journal study of college basketball team valuations ranked Dayton No. 23 nationally with 2014 adjusted revenues in excess of $16.6 million (highest for non-football conference programs) and a valuation of nearly $84 million — second highest for non-football conference programs and higher than programs such as Florida, Texas, and Michigan).

SLU is located in a big city fairly near Wichita, Tulsa, Memphis and Cincy. It has an endowment of $1.2 billion and shared a league (the Metro) with Memphis, Cincy, South Florida and Tulane. The Billikens have had some nationally known coaches and good teams.

VCU was once in the Metro with South Florida and Tulane. It offers a strong fan base and good-sized city (Richmond). VCU is nationally known due to Final Four and quality coaches (Shaka Smart, Will Wade, Sonny Smith, Jeff Capel and Anthony Grant). Of note, in 2017, VCU was ranked the 40th most valuable men's basketball program in the country by The Wall Street Journal, with a valuation of almost $57 million.

That a strong 14 for hoops (potentially, and likely, better than when the AAC had 12 with UConn) and a strong 12 in football and, with App State or Marshall in this hypothetical, clearly better than with UConn football.

As many posters have noted, there are hybrids elsewhere. Notre Dame does not play a full slate of football games in the ACC. UConn will have the only DI football program of Big East members. Hawaii is football only in the Mountain West. The hybrid can be done (as it currently is doing rather well in the American with Navy and WSU).

The American is not the SEC or Big Ten, which have the luxury of not needing a hybrid model. It has to "think outside the box."

The AAC's goal is to be as good in as many areas (academic prestige, football, men's and women's hoops, baseball, endowments, overall budgets, fan bases, locations of schools, etc.) as possible. If the league is able to stay put with the 12 schools it has, so be it. But if it must expand for football purposes, which I feel is likely, a furthering of the hybrid should not automatically be ruled out.

St Louis brings nothing. I'm not sure why you are caught up on them. Hell Murray State would bring a better fan base and pedigree than the stuck up Billikins. If we're trying to build a tier one basketball conference, you need to bring in high level programs. The only ones currently out there that would come actually move to the AAC are Dayton and VCU. That's it, there are no other worthy adds.

The fact that you referred to the SLU program as "stuck up" suggests you have a strong bias against it. That hurts your argument.

As a long-time Vandy and Memphis fan, I have had my biases against Tennessee over the years. But I will admit UT would be an excellent member of any hypothetical future conference that involves VU and UofM.

I think we'd have to get rid of ECU first.

(04-27-2020 12:06 AM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The AAC already has problems and one is a lack of positive national perception for its men's basketball. The league is losing UConn. Those on this board who are negative toward UConn can spin it anyway they want to make the loss seem like "no big deal", but the reality remains — the league is losing what most reasonable and fair-minded folks would contend is its top men's basketball brand (UConn).

This is true. It's also entirely irrelevant. Hell, people are cheering many believe the loss of the football program negates the loss of their basketball program. Basketball fans are mourning, and I understand this, but it's not a massive loss revenue, or a threat to league stability but rather many are treating as a genuine opportunity - that should tell you something.

UConn won a national championship and is leaving.
Syracuse won a national championship while in the BE and basically the day afterwards tried to walk out the door with Miami and BC.
Meanwhile, UCF was invited to the BE before Memphis, or Tulsa, or Dayton, Butler, Marquette, etc.
Basketball doesn't matter in conference building and we need to acknowledge this.

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  As many posters have noted, there are hybrids elsewhere. Notre Dame does not play a full slate of football games in the ACC. UConn will have the only DI football program of Big East members. Hawaii is football only in the Mountain West. The hybrid can be done (as it currently is doing rather well in the American with Navy and WSU).

No, these are not hybrids. This is Notre Dame showing it's influence and power to get a sweatheart deal with a major conference because they can, just like Navy could with us. Hawaii and UConn are on the other ends of the spectrum - they're desparate, and I'm not kidding. One school exceptions are not genuine BE large group hybrid dynamics with genuine philosophical disagreements, and it's intentionally disingenuous to sell them as such.

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  The AAC's goal is to be as good in as many areas (academic prestige, football, men's and women's hoops, baseball, endowments, overall budgets, fan bases, locations of schools, etc.) as possible. If the league is able to stay put with the 12 schools it has, so be it. But if it must expand for football purposes, which I feel is likely, a furthering of the hybrid should not automatically be ruled out.

Yes, it is. Only we have to prioritize if we actually want to survive, and football matters and basketball doesn't.
We need to nix any talk of a burgeoning hybrid talk as soon as possible because it is open stupidity and short-sighted.

Basketball "doesn't matter" to the American??????

I agree with you that the hybrids of the three leagues I mentioned are not as significant as would be the hybrid I favor for the American. However, that does not mean a bolstered hybrid could not work for the AAC.

The "massive loss" with UConn is not so much about Husky football, revenues or even men's basketball. The loss is in positive national perception. UConn had the highest athletics budget of any other AAC program. It has recent championships in two of the main four college sports (men's and women's hoops). It is strong in baseball and is typically ranked about the nation's top 35 or so public universities. Regardless of its bad football and financial woes, UConn is perceived as a much more prestigious all-around institution (academics and athletics) that most of the AAC programs.

Leagues try to replace prestige with prestige. The trio of Dayton, SLU and VCU would give the AAC a more prestigious men's basketball grouping that the lone addition of UAB (which, to be fair, has quality hoops). Now, if you don't care about hoops, that fine. But to argue men's basketball "doesn't matter," I'm at a loss.

Count me in with the dont-add-anyone crowd.

I mean, didn't we learn our lesson from the old BE about burdening yourself with basketball only schools?

And these football up and comers? Are they here to stay or just flashes in the pan? Where's Western Michigan now? We can't afford another "Well... they're at least good in football" addition only to have them go south and offer nothing to the conference (not naming names).

The only ones I would consider maybe adding... and that's a big MAYBE... would be SDSU, Boise or Colorado St.

Maybe.

(04-27-2020 08:15 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-27-2020 12:02 AM)Shox Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 05:53 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 04:45 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  Even with Miami and VT in the conference, the hoops schools called the shots. That’s why the football schools had to wait so long to even be invited for full membership, except Miami. The AAC just has a completely different dynamic and that was my point. The non football schools would never call the shots in this league and they would be badly outnumbered.

Yeah, that's what I figured. The basketball schools ran the show and it was the football schools that got pi$$ed off and all left, one by one.
But while I agree that basketball schools will never run the conference it still doesn't stop them from getting a backdoor share of some of that football money. That's gonna upset people, bigtime.
And, again, start bringing in basketball schools and over time and realignment they will start to vote as a block and start to weld more power. and then we have problems.

The AAC already has problems and one is a lack of positive national perception for its men's basketball. The league is losing UConn. Those on this board who are negative toward UConn can spin it anyway they want to make the loss seem like "no big deal", but the reality remains — the league is losing what most reasonable and fair-minded folks would contend is its top men's basketball brand (UConn).

IF (and I don't see it happening) the American were bold and invited Dayton, Saint Louis and VCU, I would almost certainly think the three would come. Some skeptics might argue, say, one of the three might be less than ready to accept. So, let's say, for example, that Dayton is hesitant. I would think it would still accept the invite for concern of (again, for example) the American taking some other A10 program to go with VCU and SLU. So, and in this case, Dayton by not accepting would risk being left behind in an A10 that is losing VCU, Saint Louis and, say, UMass (for perhaps all sports but football) or Davidson. That's a wounded A10 that Dayton might not want to be a part of. Dayton comes with VCU and SLU, as I see it.

If the American were to land VCU, Dayton and Saint Louis to go with its current seven all-time Top 75 to 100 programs (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, SMU, Temple, Tulsa and Wichita), that's 10 all-time top 100 programs. Get App State for football only and it's still only four non-football to 12 football.

Dayton has a strong history and tremendous fan base. It has shared a league with Memphis and Cincy. The Flyers would bring an instant, and heated, rivalry with Cincy in the American. A 2015 Wall Street Journal study of college basketball team valuations ranked Dayton No. 23 nationally with 2014 adjusted revenues in excess of $16.6 million (highest for non-football conference programs) and a valuation of nearly $84 million — second highest for non-football conference programs and higher than programs such as Florida, Texas, and Michigan).

SLU is located in a big city fairly near Wichita, Tulsa, Memphis and Cincy. It has an endowment of $1.2 billion and shared a league (the Metro) with Memphis, Cincy, South Florida and Tulane. The Billikens have had some nationally known coaches and good teams.

VCU was once in the Metro with South Florida and Tulane. It offers a strong fan base and good-sized city (Richmond). VCU is nationally known due to Final Four and quality coaches (Shaka Smart, Will Wade, Sonny Smith, Jeff Capel and Anthony Grant). Of note, in 2017, VCU was ranked the 40th most valuable men's basketball program in the country by The Wall Street Journal, with a valuation of almost $57 million.

That a strong 14 for hoops (potentially, and likely, better than when the AAC had 12 with UConn) and a strong 12 in football and, with App State or Marshall in this hypothetical, clearly better than with UConn football.

As many posters have noted, there are hybrids elsewhere. Notre Dame does not play a full slate of football games in the ACC. UConn will have the only DI football program of Big East members. Hawaii is football only in the Mountain West. The hybrid can be done (as it currently is doing rather well in the American with Navy and WSU).

The American is not the SEC or Big Ten, which have the luxury of not needing a hybrid model. It has to "think outside the box."

The AAC's goal is to be as good in as many areas (academic prestige, football, men's and women's hoops, baseball, endowments, overall budgets, fan bases, locations of schools, etc.) as possible. If the league is able to stay put with the 12 schools it has, so be it. But if it must expand for football purposes, which I feel is likely, a furthering of the hybrid should not automatically be ruled out.

St Louis brings nothing. I'm not sure why you are caught up on them. Hell Murray State would bring a better fan base and pedigree than the stuck up Billikins. If we're trying to build a tier one basketball conference, you need to bring in high level programs. The only ones currently out there that would come actually move to the AAC are Dayton and VCU. That's it, there are no other worthy adds.

The fact that you referred to the SLU program as "stuck up" suggests you have a strong bias against it. That hurts your argument.

As a long-time Vandy and Memphis fan, I have had my biases against Tennessee over the years. But I will admit UT would be an excellent member of any hypothetical future conference that involves VU and UofM.

Might want to go look at St. Louis history. The shocker has it right and I like St. Louis. They will be a distant 3rd to VCU and Dayton.

(04-27-2020 08:54 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(04-27-2020 08:15 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-27-2020 12:02 AM)Shox Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 11:36 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(04-26-2020 05:53 PM)SMUleopold Wrote:  Yeah, that's what I figured. The basketball schools ran the show and it was the football schools that got pi$$ed off and all left, one by one.
But while I agree that basketball schools will never run the conference it still doesn't stop them from getting a backdoor share of some of that football money. That's gonna upset people, bigtime.
And, again, start bringing in basketball schools and over time and realignment they will start to vote as a block and start to weld more power. and then we have problems.

The AAC already has problems and one is a lack of positive national perception for its men's basketball. The league is losing UConn. Those on this board who are negative toward UConn can spin it anyway they want to make the loss seem like "no big deal", but the reality remains — the league is losing what most reasonable and fair-minded folks would contend is its top men's basketball brand (UConn).

IF (and I don't see it happening) the American were bold and invited Dayton, Saint Louis and VCU, I would almost certainly think the three would come. Some skeptics might argue, say, one of the three might be less than ready to accept. So, let's say, for example, that Dayton is hesitant. I would think it would still accept the invite for concern of (again, for example) the American taking some other A10 program to go with VCU and SLU. So, and in this case, Dayton by not accepting would risk being left behind in an A10 that is losing VCU, Saint Louis and, say, UMass (for perhaps all sports but football) or Davidson. That's a wounded A10 that Dayton might not want to be a part of. Dayton comes with VCU and SLU, as I see it.

If the American were to land VCU, Dayton and Saint Louis to go with its current seven all-time Top 75 to 100 programs (Cincy, Houston, Memphis, SMU, Temple, Tulsa and Wichita), that's 10 all-time top 100 programs. Get App State for football only and it's still only four non-football to 12 football.

Dayton has a strong history and tremendous fan base. It has shared a league with Memphis and Cincy. The Flyers would bring an instant, and heated, rivalry with Cincy in the American. A 2015 Wall Street Journal study of college basketball team valuations ranked Dayton No. 23 nationally with 2014 adjusted revenues in excess of $16.6 million (highest for non-football conference programs) and a valuation of nearly $84 million — second highest for non-football conference programs and higher than programs such as Florida, Texas, and Michigan).

SLU is located in a big city fairly near Wichita, Tulsa, Memphis and Cincy. It has an endowment of $1.2 billion and shared a league (the Metro) with Memphis, Cincy, South Florida and Tulane. The Billikens have had some nationally known coaches and good teams.

VCU was once in the Metro with South Florida and Tulane. It offers a strong fan base and good-sized city (Richmond). VCU is nationally known due to Final Four and quality coaches (Shaka Smart, Will Wade, Sonny Smith, Jeff Capel and Anthony Grant). Of note, in 2017, VCU was ranked the 40th most valuable men's basketball program in the country by The Wall Street Journal, with a valuation of almost $57 million.

That a strong 14 for hoops (potentially, and likely, better than when the AAC had 12 with UConn) and a strong 12 in football and, with App State or Marshall in this hypothetical, clearly better than with UConn football.

As many posters have noted, there are hybrids elsewhere. Notre Dame does not play a full slate of football games in the ACC. UConn will have the only DI football program of Big East members. Hawaii is football only in the Mountain West. The hybrid can be done (as it currently is doing rather well in the American with Navy and WSU).

The American is not the SEC or Big Ten, which have the luxury of not needing a hybrid model. It has to "think outside the box."

The AAC's goal is to be as good in as many areas (academic prestige, football, men's and women's hoops, baseball, endowments, overall budgets, fan bases, locations of schools, etc.) as possible. If the league is able to stay put with the 12 schools it has, so be it. But if it must expand for football purposes, which I feel is likely, a furthering of the hybrid should not automatically be ruled out.

St Louis brings nothing. I'm not sure why you are caught up on them. Hell Murray State would bring a better fan base and pedigree than the stuck up Billikins. If we're trying to build a tier one basketball conference, you need to bring in high level programs. The only ones currently out there that would come actually move to the AAC are Dayton and VCU. That's it, there are no other worthy adds.

The fact that you referred to the SLU program as "stuck up" suggests you have a strong bias against it. That hurts your argument.

As a long-time Vandy and Memphis fan, I have had my biases against Tennessee over the years. But I will admit UT would be an excellent member of any hypothetical future conference that involves VU and UofM.

Might want to go look at St. Louis history. The shocker has it right and I like St. Louis. They will be a distant 3rd to VCU and Dayton.

I feel like St. Louis is only in this conversation because a) they have history with some members and b) they're in a big market. They haven't been consistent; they did have a nice stretch for 3 years about 10 years ago, but there's also huge swaths of not making a tournament.

Admittedly, the pool of good candidates isn't real deep. Dayton and VCU are very clearly the top candidates, and St. Louis does have some of the best attendance of the remaining options. But how about a school that some history and a fan base that might benefit from the AAC and become more? Rhode Island especially seems like a good institutional fit with as much basketball potential as SLU.

How about others? Charleston? Davidson? Richmond? Maybe someone with a giant market and growth potential like Fordham? Or a giant public school that hasn't realized its potential yet like George Mason or UIC? I'm just not sold that SLU will ultimately offer much more in the long-term than those, especially if those schools are elevated into a power conference like the AAC.

Regardless, I don't really see a need for a third member. An odd number works fine in basketball. Let's get Dayton and VCU in and become a better basketball conference than a couple of the P5s.