(01-26-2020 04:36 PM)Fishpro10987 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2020 03:15 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: [ -> ]IMO the only way it would work successfully would be to have 14 teams. The 3 new schools would need to bring in 21 million per year to maintain the current contract levels while providing all sports spots for all conference teams. I believe a combination of BSU and BYU would bring this in with AFA or SDSU as the 3rd team. With BYU unlikely would a combination of BSU/AFA/SDSU bring in enough $? I think there is a lot of value selling those later time spots and those schools were the mwcs best tv draws. SDSU would bring quality basketball inventory for later tip offs.
East
UCF
USF
ECU
Temple
Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulane
West
Houston
SMU
Tulsa
Navy
AFA
BSU
SDSU
Where do I sign?
I could get on board with this, too.
(01-26-2020 07:21 PM)First Mate Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 11:25 AM)BSUTOP25 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:59 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:50 AM)B easy Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:47 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ]You are correct that if ESPN cares enough they can make it happen. It would probably require ESPN to pay the AAC more though to make it financially worth it for Boise to move. The question is does ESPN care that much?
Yes.
For the move to make financial sense for Boise ESPN would probably have to raise the AAC's payout where Boise would make at least 8 million a year on a FB only share. We'll see.
The only way Boise State would join the AAC is with full membership and a true western division. I don't see the boosters/sponsors/fans supporting a partial membership with oly sports in the Big West, Big Sky, or WAC. Too much at stake for a new university president to make unilateral decisions without input from all the school's stakeholders.
An all sports western division is possible but would require Houston, SMU, and Tulsa to agree to being in it. I just don't see that happening.
Why wouldn’t they just join AAC football only and put all other sports in the WCC with Gonzaga, BYU, and St Mary’s? Assuming the WCC would take them.
That would seem to be a win-win for Boise. Basically an upgrade in both categories.
Having your football in one conference (or independent) and all other sports in another is never ideal — unless you're Notre Dame (and, to a lesser extent, UConn).
(01-25-2020 03:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 11:37 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 10:30 AM)Atlanta Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 10:18 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 07:05 AM)BSUTOP25 Wrote: [ -> ]No offense Gaucho but having football in one conference and oly sports in another isn’t ideal. That and Boise State would be a geographical outlier in both conferences.
Geography is the one point everyone keeps seeing to want to minimize. Like having schools that are not in your geographic area is not a drag on attendance and ultimately on $$$.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
OK, what's GA St's excuse?
If you're asking would I rather play UAB, Wake and UNC at home over Western Michigan, that's really easy. But what we are actually talking about is why Boise and BYU are still unlikely to put their football in the AAC, right? Deflect all you like. The reality for everyone is that it's getting harder to get people to leave their sofa and man cave and 75 inch TVs to come to a stadium. It becomes that much harder when the draw is a team from 1200 miles away or more you have no connection to that isn't a well known historical P5 brand. Ultimately the goal of college athletics is still marketing of the University and primarily to get people onto campus in Saturday, so they can feel some scholastic nostalgia and pride so that when the University calls on Tuesday for donations, you do not send them directly to voicemail. Boise leadership most likely is not going to blow up rivalries and their home schedule unless they are handed P5 money.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
So now your actually making sense. Georgia St is new to FBS and has no real connection to anyone. Furthermore, its nearly 800 to 1000 miles away for western division teams---so zero geographic connection.
But here is the thing---geography is NOT everything. Brand can transcend distance. Notre Dame would be as big game in California as it would be Michigan. While clearly NOT having a brand anywhere near Notre Dame----Boise does have a brand that ranks among the very biggest in the G5. Most any fan is far more likely to trade the sofa for a stadium seat in order to watch his team play Boise than he would for a game vs Georgia St (or UAB, or Buffalo, or UMass, etc).
So yes, geography matters---but "brand" trumps geography virtually every time.
Brand helps, but if the advantages of the brand is BSU or BYU, with later night starts, how much of an advantage is it to the ratings of the conference. We have seen what late night ratings are doing to the PAC.
How long has UCF been in D1 (a hint, not long).
Boise takes a pay cut to move to AAC. Oly sports to WAC are another pay cut.
(01-26-2020 12:33 AM)nocoolnamejim Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 04:55 AM)sierrajip Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 06:45 PM)Coach Bonez89 Wrote: [ -> ]Buck Foise State. Let them rot on the blue turf. They had their chance. Sometimes you choose wisely, but in this case, they chose poorly. No Indiana Jones pun/ quotes intended.
I thought that also, but am coming around to the slim possibility that BSU, along with a couple of other western teams, could improve the conference along with the possibility of an ESPin raise.
Something like this maybe? I posted it on another board but am curious as to what AAC fans would think of it. BTW, I do agree completely that unless a western division is created, BSU is highly unlikely to come and that I doubt any other MWC team wants to be stuck on an island somewhere either.
Presumably going to the AAC only works if that conference forms a real western division.
It does not strike me as as far fetched that it might sound on the surface.
Adding BSU, say SDSU and Fresno State, Air Force and one other tbd (BYU would be best but not sure they'd do it.) brings a lot of advantages to the AAC.
1. Guts their closest G5 rival in the MWC. This move would pretty much permanently settle which G5 conference gets the autobid each year. The MWC's football power would basically be reduced to the Sun Belt conference by doing this.
2. Adds California recruiting to them already having Texas and Florida.
3. Improves their argument that they are a "Power" conference again.
4. Would bring a lot to the table for TV contract renegotiation.
5. Isn't bad for basketball either, which again, gets them more into Power conference discussions.
6. Unites Air Force and Navy into the same conference.
So while a lot of people are talking about potentially having to park our other sports in a less than pristine place, I would think if BSU WERE to leave the MWC, they would suggest something like this to the AAC.
Perhaps something like this?
West:
Boise State
SDSU
Fresno State
Air Force
UNLV (mainly a basketball add at this point but I would assume BYU wouldn't go for this)
Houston
SMU
Tulsa
East:
Memphis
Cincinnati
UCF
South Florida
Tulane
Navy
East Carolina
Temple
Each team plays everyone in their division once in football (7 games) then the division winners face off (that makes 8) and has rotating games against one other team in the other division (for things like recruiting the big-3 states of California, Texas and Florida and to allow games like Navy vs. Air Force to be played every year). Then you add four out conference games and you have the same 13 game regular season schedule that we do now.
Having a real western division also neatly solves concerns about what to do with non-football sports and makes the travel far less onerous.
ESPiN raise would have to pay, per team, a lot more for that number of additions. Three teams from the MWC seems to be a better fit.
(01-26-2020 09:06 PM)sierrajip Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 03:07 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 11:37 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 10:30 AM)Atlanta Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 10:18 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ]Geography is the one point everyone keeps seeing to want to minimize. Like having schools that are not in your geographic area is not a drag on attendance and ultimately on $$$.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
OK, what's GA St's excuse?
If you're asking would I rather play UAB, Wake and UNC at home over Western Michigan, that's really easy. But what we are actually talking about is why Boise and BYU are still unlikely to put their football in the AAC, right? Deflect all you like. The reality for everyone is that it's getting harder to get people to leave their sofa and man cave and 75 inch TVs to come to a stadium. It becomes that much harder when the draw is a team from 1200 miles away or more you have no connection to that isn't a well known historical P5 brand. Ultimately the goal of college athletics is still marketing of the University and primarily to get people onto campus in Saturday, so they can feel some scholastic nostalgia and pride so that when the University calls on Tuesday for donations, you do not send them directly to voicemail. Boise leadership most likely is not going to blow up rivalries and their home schedule unless they are handed P5 money.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
So now your actually making sense. Georgia St is new to FBS and has no real connection to anyone. Furthermore, its nearly 800 to 1000 miles away for western division teams---so zero geographic connection.
But here is the thing---geography is NOT everything. Brand can transcend distance. Notre Dame would be as big game in California as it would be Michigan. While clearly NOT having a brand anywhere near Notre Dame----Boise does have a brand that ranks among the very biggest in the G5. Most any fan is far more likely to trade the sofa for a stadium seat in order to watch his team play Boise than he would for a game vs Georgia St (or UAB, or Buffalo, or UMass, etc).
So yes, geography matters---but "brand" trumps geography virtually every time.
Brand helps, but if the advantages of the brand is BSU or BYU, with later night starts, how much of an advantage is it to the ratings of the conference. We have seen what late night ratings are doing to the PAC.
How long has UCF been in D1 (a hint, not long).
UCF and BSU are pretty unique with the level of success they have had in a relatively short time period. Both entered the FBS in 1996
(01-26-2020 09:14 PM)sierrajip Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2020 12:33 AM)nocoolnamejim Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 04:55 AM)sierrajip Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 06:45 PM)Coach Bonez89 Wrote: [ -> ]Buck Foise State. Let them rot on the blue turf. They had their chance. Sometimes you choose wisely, but in this case, they chose poorly. No Indiana Jones pun/ quotes intended.
I thought that also, but am coming around to the slim possibility that BSU, along with a couple of other western teams, could improve the conference along with the possibility of an ESPin raise.
Something like this maybe? I posted it on another board but am curious as to what AAC fans would think of it. BTW, I do agree completely that unless a western division is created, BSU is highly unlikely to come and that I doubt any other MWC team wants to be stuck on an island somewhere either.
Presumably going to the AAC only works if that conference forms a real western division.
It does not strike me as as far fetched that it might sound on the surface.
Adding BSU, say SDSU and Fresno State, Air Force and one other tbd (BYU would be best but not sure they'd do it.) brings a lot of advantages to the AAC.
1. Guts their closest G5 rival in the MWC. This move would pretty much permanently settle which G5 conference gets the autobid each year. The MWC's football power would basically be reduced to the Sun Belt conference by doing this.
2. Adds California recruiting to them already having Texas and Florida.
3. Improves their argument that they are a "Power" conference again.
4. Would bring a lot to the table for TV contract renegotiation.
5. Isn't bad for basketball either, which again, gets them more into Power conference discussions.
6. Unites Air Force and Navy into the same conference.
So while a lot of people are talking about potentially having to park our other sports in a less than pristine place, I would think if BSU WERE to leave the MWC, they would suggest something like this to the AAC.
Perhaps something like this?
West:
Boise State
SDSU
Fresno State
Air Force
UNLV (mainly a basketball add at this point but I would assume BYU wouldn't go for this)
Houston
SMU
Tulsa
East:
Memphis
Cincinnati
UCF
South Florida
Tulane
Navy
East Carolina
Temple
Each team plays everyone in their division once in football (7 games) then the division winners face off (that makes 8) and has rotating games against one other team in the other division (for things like recruiting the big-3 states of California, Texas and Florida and to allow games like Navy vs. Air Force to be played every year). Then you add four out conference games and you have the same 13 game regular season schedule that we do now.
Having a real western division also neatly solves concerns about what to do with non-football sports and makes the travel far less onerous.
ESPiN raise would have to pay, per team, a lot more for that number of additions. Three teams from the MWC seems to be a better fit.
I think 14 is as big as it would go. With the right 3 teams who add value. If both BYU and BSU are part of it I could see a better bowl lineup and no loss of per team revenue
(01-26-2020 12:18 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2020 10:14 AM)bearcat29 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.deseret.com/sports/2020/1/24...mormon-lds
BYU's perspective on MWC.
This is why I've been thinking since last August that Air Force/VCU more than any other MW member or BYU will be more likely to be added... More long term STABILITY at 12/12.
Stability? In the AAC there is no such thing.
(01-26-2020 02:50 PM)owl at the moon Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 11:49 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 10:42 AM)vick mike Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 10:18 AM)panama Wrote: [ -> ] (01-25-2020 07:05 AM)BSUTOP25 Wrote: [ -> ]No offense Gaucho but having football in one conference and oly sports in another isn’t ideal. That and Boise State would be a geographical outlier in both conferences.
Geography is the one point everyone keeps seeing to want to minimize. Like having schools that are not in your geographic area is not a drag on attendance and ultimately on $$$.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Panama is right; geography matters in college sports. There have been numerous studies done on this, from cost to performance. Boise is too far from our east coast teams.
Edit: and it’s a 3 hour flight from Houston to Boise, not 1.5 hours.
The only nonstop I could find from Houston is listed at 4hr 2mins. And that is because HOU is a hub.
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Pro tip: fly into IAH instead of HOU to save 10 or 15 minutes of flight time.
((Then you get to Spend two hours sitting in traffic gloating about the time you saved!))
(01-26-2020 03:15 PM)EDLUVAR Wrote: [ -> ]IMO the only way it would work successfully would be to have 14 teams. The 3 new schools would need to bring in 21 million per year to maintain the current contract levels while providing all sports spots for all conference teams. I believe a combination of BSU and BYU would bring this in with AFA or SDSU as the 3rd team. With BYU unlikely would a combination of BSU/AFA/SDSU bring in enough $? I think there is a lot of value selling those later time spots and those schools were the mwcs best tv draws. SDSU would bring quality basketball inventory for later tip offs.
East
UCF
USF
ECU
Temple
Cincinnati
Memphis
Tulane
West
Houston
SMU
Tulsa
Navy
AFA
BSU
SDSU
No way bring in three teams at the same price per team. Stay at 11 at that point. If ESPiN wants to break up the MWC, it has to be at a higher contractual cost.
No Boise State will not be in the AAC in two years or five or whenever. This conference is not replacing one prima Donna for another. Bridges were burned years ago , lessons were learned and those wounds tend to fester.
The AAC doesn’t need Boise State , much as Boise State needs the AAC. They are purely bluffing and are not going anywhere.
(01-26-2020 07:21 PM)First Mate Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 11:25 AM)BSUTOP25 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:59 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:50 AM)B easy Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:47 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ]You are correct that if ESPN cares enough they can make it happen. It would probably require ESPN to pay the AAC more though to make it financially worth it for Boise to move. The question is does ESPN care that much?
Yes.
For the move to make financial sense for Boise ESPN would probably have to raise the AAC's payout where Boise would make at least 8 million a year on a FB only share. We'll see.
The only way Boise State would join the AAC is with full membership and a true western division. I don't see the boosters/sponsors/fans supporting a partial membership with oly sports in the Big West, Big Sky, or WAC. Too much at stake for a new university president to make unilateral decisions without input from all the school's stakeholders.
An all sports western division is possible but would require Houston, SMU, and Tulsa to agree to being in it. I just don't see that happening.
Why wouldn’t they just join AAC football only and put all other sports in the WCC with Gonzaga, BYU, and St Mary’s? Assuming the WCC would take them.
That would seem to be a win-win for Boise. Basically an upgrade in both categories.
No more of the OBE deals. Unless it is AF, it is all sports to make "ALL" of the schools involved happy. It is not going to be a perfect scenario, but one that does make it stabilized, to a point.
(01-26-2020 08:28 PM)8BitPirate Wrote: [ -> ]Georgia State should be added to balance SDSU.
Lol
Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
IF... BYU and Boise joined this league I could see the AAC favoring a GOR.. And with a GOR in place this league will immediately then stabilized the back bone stability of the AAC while also fetching a newer favorable sexy tv deal between $15 million - $18 million each b/c of the GOR.
(01-26-2020 09:21 PM)sierrajip Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2020 12:18 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2020 10:14 AM)bearcat29 Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.deseret.com/sports/2020/1/24...mormon-lds
BYU's perspective on MWC.
This is why I've been thinking since last August that Air Force/VCU more than any other MW member or BYU will be more likely to be added... More long term STABILITY at 12/12.
Stability? In the AAC there is no such thing.
True, but with P6 comes stability... I Hope...
(01-26-2020 09:38 PM)sierrajip Wrote: [ -> ] (01-26-2020 07:21 PM)First Mate Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 11:25 AM)BSUTOP25 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:59 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ] (01-24-2020 10:50 AM)B easy Wrote: [ -> ]Yes.
For the move to make financial sense for Boise ESPN would probably have to raise the AAC's payout where Boise would make at least 8 million a year on a FB only share. We'll see.
The only way Boise State would join the AAC is with full membership and a true western division. I don't see the boosters/sponsors/fans supporting a partial membership with oly sports in the Big West, Big Sky, or WAC. Too much at stake for a new university president to make unilateral decisions without input from all the school's stakeholders.
An all sports western division is possible but would require Houston, SMU, and Tulsa to agree to being in it. I just don't see that happening.
Why wouldn’t they just join AAC football only and put all other sports in the WCC with Gonzaga, BYU, and St Mary’s? Assuming the WCC would take them.
That would seem to be a win-win for Boise. Basically an upgrade in both categories.
No more of the OBE deals. Unless it is AF, it is all sports to make "ALL" of the schools involved happy. It is not going to be a perfect scenario, but one that does make it stabilized, to a point.
Completely agree;
- Army/VCU, Air Force/VCU only split pairings this conference should ever do.
- If going to 12 with ether BYU/BSU/SDSU or any other additions it should
- be an all sports
addition.
- If going past 12 with whomever... it should be an all sports addition.
I don't think it is wise to go beyond 12 unless its with BYU/BSU/SDSU, P6 status w/ NY6 tie, and a GOR.
I don't see a downside in adding Boise, from the American's perspective. As most have said, it is all up to ESPN to name the price that may make Boise jump. Boise roams, so if they jump back west in 6 years, that is fine, they'll make the conference better (and maybe give them a pay increase) until then.
Because BYU is not coming, I think the ideal for the AAC is 13: BSU and AFA (another national brand) to the West, Memphis to the East. With the MAC/CUSA 13-team waiver, you could modulate who travels to the MTZ more or less often.
Again, ESPN just has to name the right price and they can get the top 2 remaining mid-majors of the West. On Boise's side, their lawsuit may even be able to get a reduced exit-fee from the MW. What about CSU or SDSU? Well, if 11>12, then 13>14; as was stated last Summer, the interest is only in schools that increase the per capita value.
(01-27-2020 02:29 AM)Crayton Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see a downside in adding Boise, from the American's perspective. As most have said, it is all up to ESPN to name the price that may make Boise jump. Boise roams, so if they jump back west in 6 years, that is fine, they'll make the conference better (and maybe give them a pay increase) until then.
Because BYU is not coming, I think the ideal for the AAC is 13: BSU and AFA (another national brand) to the West, Memphis to the East. With the MAC/CUSA 13-team waiver, you could modulate who travels to the MTZ more or less often.
Again, ESPN just has to name the right price and they can get the top 2 remaining mid-majors of the West. On Boise's side, their lawsuit may even be able to get a reduced exit-fee from the MW. What about CSU or SDSU? Well, if 11>12, then 13>14; as was stated last Summer, the interest is only in schools that increase the per capita value.
The problem is that the AAC schools wouldn't want to see one school paid more than the others.
One way to overcome this might be by offering BSU - and the other AAC schools - an incentive clause, such as a $2 million bonus for playing in the NY6, and a $5 million bonus if an AAC team makes it into the championship series.
It makes no sense for Boise to come as a FB only, the tiny raise they may get will be totally eaten up by Travel cost. If they come, and I don't think it will happen, it almost has to be all sports, and AAC schools need to get 750k to a $million increase per year. Considering the Boise add would simply be a UCONN swap, you still need ESPN to kick in an extra 8 to 12 mil per year. Would they be willing to do that? I don't know.