(04-09-2014 03:59 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 03:01 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 02:35 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 10:23 AM)Caelligh Wrote:  I say we set our standards higher: Big 12, at a minimum. Maybe we don't have the records or attendance in football and basketball to get in right now, but we can already show progress in making the investments needed to get there. The Big 12 geographic footprint, level of competition, etc. are more attractive than what the AAC offers, and the Big 12 does not include a Houston-area school in its membership.

Ultimately, yes, but I expect the Big 12 to look much more favorably on a school from the top of the AAC than one from the top of C-USA or the Sun Belt.

I don't agree with this, because Rice has some intrinsic qualities as a university that still make it more attractive than, say, UH or UCF. All else being equal, universities are going to choose to athletically associate with the more distinguished schools, especially schools with deeper pockets. Assuming Rice gets its ship in order, Rice can put together an attractive case for why its academics, Houston location, and long historical tradition in D1 make it more appealing than commuter schools like UH and UCF. Rice has to get its athletics act together, but Rice's academic reputation still matters for something. TCU's admission into the Big 12 was based on a personal relationship between CDC and DeLoss Dodds. Rice can still get a foot in the door as a distinguished academic school, but it has to then offer an organized and promising athletics program.

Shot-calling conferences like the PAC-12, Big Ten, and SEC are going to demand that any new entrant be distinguished academically, either as a flagship public university or a good private school. Boise State and Fresno State will never get into the PAC-12. I just don't see the PAC-12, Big Ten, or SEC bringing in any commuter schools, because they can afford to be very choosy. The big conferences consider Rice as disorganized athletically, but if Rice can get its act together, Rice would offer some appeal, especially with the Houston market. It's the more iffy conferences like the AAC that have to micro-manage TV market-share, etc. The big boy conferences still think they can shape the TV market.

PS: I think Rice should focus its attention on getting into a P5 conference, where the big money is, rather than worrying about positioning itself with the AAC and MWC, etc. Rice should look for favorably match-ups within the non-P5 (ie, Texas schools and schools that are easy to travel to, even by flying), but the prize is definitely P5 admittance.

Then how in the world did Utah and Colorado get into the Pac-12?

The conference asked the networks how much extra $$$ they'd bring by adding them. The answer was favorable.

(04-09-2014 03:59 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 03:01 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 02:35 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 10:23 AM)Caelligh Wrote:  I say we set our standards higher: Big 12, at a minimum. Maybe we don't have the records or attendance in football and basketball to get in right now, but we can already show progress in making the investments needed to get there. The Big 12 geographic footprint, level of competition, etc. are more attractive than what the AAC offers, and the Big 12 does not include a Houston-area school in its membership.

Ultimately, yes, but I expect the Big 12 to look much more favorably on a school from the top of the AAC than one from the top of C-USA or the Sun Belt.

I don't agree with this, because Rice has some intrinsic qualities as a university that still make it more attractive than, say, UH or UCF. All else being equal, universities are going to choose to athletically associate with the more distinguished schools, especially schools with deeper pockets. Assuming Rice gets its ship in order, Rice can put together an attractive case for why its academics, Houston location, and long historical tradition in D1 make it more appealing than commuter schools like UH and UCF. Rice has to get its athletics act together, but Rice's academic reputation still matters for something. TCU's admission into the Big 12 was based on a personal relationship between CDC and DeLoss Dodds. Rice can still get a foot in the door as a distinguished academic school, but it has to then offer an organized and promising athletics program.

Shot-calling conferences like the PAC-12, Big Ten, and SEC are going to demand that any new entrant be distinguished academically, either as a flagship public university or a good private school. Boise State and Fresno State will never get into the PAC-12. I just don't see the PAC-12, Big Ten, or SEC bringing in any commuter schools, because they can afford to be very choosy. The big conferences consider Rice as disorganized athletically, but if Rice can get its act together, Rice would offer some appeal, especially with the Houston market. It's the more iffy conferences like the AAC that have to micro-manage TV market-share, etc. The big boy conferences still think they can shape the TV market.

PS: I think Rice should focus its attention on getting into a P5 conference, where the big money is, rather than worrying about positioning itself with the AAC and MWC, etc. Rice should look for favorably match-ups within the non-P5 (ie, Texas schools and schools that are easy to travel to, even by flying), but the prize is definitely P5 admittance.

Then how in the world did Utah and Colorado get into the Pac-12?

Because Utah and Colorado are the flagship public schools in their respective states. Utah State or Colorado State weren't getting in. BYU was seen as too quirky as a religious school, and their academics aren't exactly great. UH will never be allowed into the PAC, SEC, or Big Ten... ever. It's just not the sorta school they want.

I still think Rice's best bet of getting into a big-time conference is going with UT to the PAC-12, where we hold some appeal to the academically-minded schools there. If UT bolts the Big 12, perhaps as an independent, I could also see us end up in what's left of the Big 12.

(04-09-2014 03:59 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 03:01 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 02:35 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 10:23 AM)Caelligh Wrote:  I say we set our standards higher: Big 12, at a minimum. Maybe we don't have the records or attendance in football and basketball to get in right now, but we can already show progress in making the investments needed to get there. The Big 12 geographic footprint, level of competition, etc. are more attractive than what the AAC offers, and the Big 12 does not include a Houston-area school in its membership.

Ultimately, yes, but I expect the Big 12 to look much more favorably on a school from the top of the AAC than one from the top of C-USA or the Sun Belt.

I don't agree with this, because Rice has some intrinsic qualities as a university that still make it more attractive than, say, UH or UCF. All else being equal, universities are going to choose to athletically associate with the more distinguished schools, especially schools with deeper pockets. Assuming Rice gets its ship in order, Rice can put together an attractive case for why its academics, Houston location, and long historical tradition in D1 make it more appealing than commuter schools like UH and UCF. Rice has to get its athletics act together, but Rice's academic reputation still matters for something. TCU's admission into the Big 12 was based on a personal relationship between CDC and DeLoss Dodds. Rice can still get a foot in the door as a distinguished academic school, but it has to then offer an organized and promising athletics program.

Shot-calling conferences like the PAC-12, Big Ten, and SEC are going to demand that any new entrant be distinguished academically, either as a flagship public university or a good private school. Boise State and Fresno State will never get into the PAC-12. I just don't see the PAC-12, Big Ten, or SEC bringing in any commuter schools, because they can afford to be very choosy. The big conferences consider Rice as disorganized athletically, but if Rice can get its act together, Rice would offer some appeal, especially with the Houston market. It's the more iffy conferences like the AAC that have to micro-manage TV market-share, etc. The big boy conferences still think they can shape the TV market.

PS: I think Rice should focus its attention on getting into a P5 conference, where the big money is, rather than worrying about positioning itself with the AAC and MWC, etc. Rice should look for favorably match-ups within the non-P5 (ie, Texas schools and schools that are easy to travel to, even by flying), but the prize is definitely P5 admittance.

Then how in the world did Utah and Colorado get into the Pac-12?

Utah and Colorado got into the Pac-12 because they are the doctoral degree granting flagship university of their state. Up to the 50's, the University of Idaho was in the "Pac-X".

Fresno State, San Jose State, and San Diego State will never get into the Pac-12 because they are not doctoral degree granting universities (I believe San Diego St may have a few joint programs with UCSD). The 2 most likely universities in CA that could have joined the Pac-12 had they continued their D1 football programs were UOP and Santa Clara. UC Davis has moved up from D2 to FCS and could be an option if they continue to upgrade. Cal Poly (the SLO version) who has moved up with UC Davis will never be an option because they are not a doctoral granting university.

Therefore, the Pac-12 needed to look eastward for schools equivalent to Cal, UCLA, UA, ASU, UO, OSU, UW, and WSU. Private schools equivalent to USC and Stanford are even harder to find. Santa Clara and UOP were the only ones that had been within the Pac-12 footprint. BYU was a choice but they didn't fit into the culture. UNM or NMSU aren't athletically up to snuff. Neither are U of Idaho or U of Montana. That is how Colorado and Utah got in. Any further expansion by the Pac-12 will have to be east of the Rockies which is why Rice would be an option when paired with Cal and UCLA like schools (UT to be specific).

(04-09-2014 03:01 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  I don't agree with this, because Rice has some intrinsic qualities as a university that still make it more attractive than, say, UH or UCF. All else being equal, universities are going to choose to athletically associate with the more distinguished schools, especially schools with deeper pockets. Assuming Rice gets its ship in order, Rice can put together an attractive case for why its academics, Houston location, and long historical tradition in D1 make it more appealing than commuter schools like UH and UCF. Rice has to get its athletics act together, but Rice's academic reputation still matters for something. TCU's admission into the Big 12 was based on a personal relationship between CDC and DeLoss Dodds. Rice can still get a foot in the door as a distinguished academic school, but it has to then offer an organized and promising athletics program.

But all else is not equal.

For the foreseeable future, I just don't see the Big 12 offering membership directly to any school in a bottom-3 conference. I think they're more likely to remain at 10.

There's another angle we're ignoring, which is that TCU is something of a bellwether. If the Big 12 comes to the conclusion that TCU is not earning its keep, then they will be extremely reluctant to offer membership to any other small private school. So if we want them to consider expansion, then we need TCU to add value.

If they lose 3 schools then they will be forced to invite somebody. If that happens AND Rice has been dominant in C-USA, then I think we'll get a look but not be a shoo-in. This scenario has a lot of variables and their primary objective will be to retain P5 status.

(04-09-2014 03:58 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 02:35 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  Ultimately, yes, but I expect the Big 12 to look much more favorably on a school from the top of the AAC than one from the top of C-USA or the Sun Belt.

Why???

Because the AAC is a stronger conference than C-USA and the Sun Belt.

(04-09-2014 04:46 PM)ruowls Wrote:  Utah and Colorado got into the Pac-12 because they are the doctoral degree granting flagship university of their state.

Utah is a big school that was doing very well in football (2 BCS bowl wins in 5 years) and brought a pretty good TV market.

There was another factor there. Under the rules at the time, the MWC was very close to gaining BCS autobid status. Nobody outside of the MWC wanted that. If Boise had simply replaced Utah, then more action might have been necessary, but when BYU and TCU left, the crisis ended.

(04-09-2014 04:49 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  For the foreseeable future, I just don't see the Big 12 offering membership directly to any school in a bottom-3 conference. I think they're more likely to remain at 10.

If they lose 3 schools then they will be forced to invite somebody. If that happens AND Rice has been dominant in C-USA, then I think we'll get a look but not be a shoo-in. This scenario has a lot of variables and their primary objective will be to retain P5 status.

I agree with this. I don't think the Big 12 will admit Rice unless the conference is starting to fall apart, namely UT leaving. I don't see the Big 12 as a stable conference for the long term. Even within the P5, it's the PAC, SEC, and Big Ten that are the conferences that will be around 50 years from now. Rice has a tiny sliver of a chance of getting into the SEC. The Big Ten just isn't an option, but I think the PAC offers a small but realistic chance of admitting a competitive Rice program.

(04-09-2014 04:54 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 03:58 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 02:35 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  Ultimately, yes, but I expect the Big 12 to look much more favorably on a school from the top of the AAC than one from the top of C-USA or the Sun Belt.

Why???

Because the AAC is a stronger conference than C-USA and the Sun Belt.

Nominally, and I very much doubt they're viewed as significantly stronger by those in the Big 12.

What would be the logic behind the Big12 taking tiny, private Rice over any number of big schools like Memphis, Cincinnati, UH, or BYU? Academic reputation? Sorry guys, but I really don't think so. UT isn't going to recreate the SWC.

If getting out of CUSA is the primary goal here, going to the MWC with UNT, UTSA and UTEP is the only way out that I can see. Even though it's not P5, the MWC is a good conference with a good reputation.

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  What would be the logic behind the Big12 taking tiny, private Rice over any number of big schools like Memphis, Cincinnati, UH, or BYU? Academic reputation? Sorry guys, but I really don't think so. UT isn't going to recreate the SWC.

UT, TCU and others in the Big12 want to recruit the Houston area. That is tougher now that they don't play any games in Houston and the Aggies are in the SEC, making it easier for SEC schools to compete for those recruits too. in short, UT (and perhaps others) don't want UH, but do want a presence in Houston. That leaves Rice. Memphis and Cincinnati brings other things to the table, but not a lot more that Rice and they are NOT in the fertile recruiting grounds like Rice is. BYU would help the TV contracts, but not the recruiting. And BYU is (I think) perceived to be too much of a threat to challenge UT's hold on the kingdom, so that negative about kills any shot they otherwise would have.

JMHO.

(04-09-2014 05:42 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 04:54 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  Because the AAC is a stronger conference than C-USA and the Sun Belt.

Nominally, and I very much doubt they're viewed as significantly stronger by those in the Big 12.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sag...onference/
http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/tag/_/...r-rankings
http://realtimerpi.com/football/ncaaf_conf_Men.html

Going forward, who knows what the numbers will look like. I expect the gap will narrow somewhat, but the AAC programs generally have bigger budgets and better attendance, which will make it tough for C-USA to get close.

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  What would be the logic behind the Big12 taking tiny, private Rice over any number of big schools like Memphis, Cincinnati, UH, or BYU? Academic reputation? Sorry guys, but I really don't think so. UT isn't going to recreate the SWC.

Right now, I agree, it's not likely. Longer term, it depends on whether Rice can build a fan base beyond Rice alums. I don't know whether that's possible. We haven't really tried.

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  If getting out of CUSA is the primary goal here, going to the MWC with UNT, UTSA and UTEP is the only way out that I can see.

Short term, yes, that's the only way (either 2 schools or all 4).

AAC is presumably happy with their current line-up, but they could be looking if they lose schools.

(04-09-2014 07:18 PM)RiceDoc Wrote:  BYU would help the TV contracts, but not the recruiting. And BYU is (I think) perceived to be too much of a threat to challenge UT's hold on the kingdom, so that negative about kills any shot they otherwise would have.

There was some discussion of BYU (last year IIRC). They dropped that in a rush to lure Florida State (reportedly unhappy with the ACC's TV deal at the time) and one other from the ACC, but that's off the table with the ACC's new deal.

My hunch is that BYU will happen at some point, along with 1 or 3 others.

(04-09-2014 07:18 PM)RiceDoc Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  What would be the logic behind the Big12 taking tiny, private Rice over any number of big schools like Memphis, Cincinnati, UH, or BYU? Academic reputation? Sorry guys, but I really don't think so. UT isn't going to recreate the SWC.

UT, TCU and others in the Big12 want to recruit the Houston area. That is tougher now that they don't play any games in Houston and the Aggies are in the SEC, making it easier for SEC schools to compete for those recruits too. in short, UT (and perhaps others) don't want UH, but do want a presence in Houston. That leaves Rice. Memphis and Cincinnati brings other things to the table, but not a lot more that Rice and they are NOT in the fertile recruiting grounds like Rice is. BYU would help the TV contracts, but not the recruiting. And BYU is (I think) perceived to be too much of a threat to challenge UT's hold on the kingdom, so that negative about kills any shot they otherwise would have.

JMHO.

That's a little far reaching. With the recruiting budgets afforded coaches in the B12 and with the enormous alumni presence they already have here, there's no doubt in my mind that they have no trouble taking as many players from Houston as they want. Houston is already delivered. Texas is already overly saturated with B12 representation. Unfortunately, Rice brings them nothing.

(04-09-2014 10:15 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 05:42 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 04:54 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  Because the AAC is a stronger conference than C-USA and the Sun Belt.

Nominally, and I very much doubt they're viewed as significantly stronger by those in the Big 12.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sag...onference/
http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/tag/_/...r-rankings
http://realtimerpi.com/football/ncaaf_conf_Men.html

Going forward, who knows what the numbers will look like. I expect the gap will narrow somewhat, but the AAC programs generally have bigger budgets and better attendance, which will make it tough for C-USA to get close.

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  What would be the logic behind the Big12 taking tiny, private Rice over any number of big schools like Memphis, Cincinnati, UH, or BYU? Academic reputation? Sorry guys, but I really don't think so. UT isn't going to recreate the SWC.

Right now, I agree, it's not likely. Longer term, it depends on whether Rice can build a fan base beyond Rice alums. I don't know whether that's possible. We haven't really tried.

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  If getting out of CUSA is the primary goal here, going to the MWC with UNT, UTSA and UTEP is the only way out that I can see.

Short term, yes, that's the only way (either 2 schools or all 4).

AAC is presumably happy with their current line-up, but they could be looking if they lose schools.

(04-09-2014 07:18 PM)RiceDoc Wrote:  BYU would help the TV contracts, but not the recruiting. And BYU is (I think) perceived to be too much of a threat to challenge UT's hold on the kingdom, so that negative about kills any shot they otherwise would have.

There was some discussion of BYU (last year IIRC). They dropped that in a rush to lure Florida State (reportedly unhappy with the ACC's TV deal at the time) and one other from the ACC, but that's off the table with the ACC's new deal.

My hunch is that BYU will happen at some point, along with 1 or 3 others.

Those rankings between the AAC and CUSA will look much, much closer with Tulane replacing Louisville this year in the AAC.

(04-09-2014 10:15 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 05:42 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 04:54 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  Because the AAC is a stronger conference than C-USA and the Sun Belt.

Nominally, and I very much doubt they're viewed as significantly stronger by those in the Big 12.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaaf/sag...onference/
http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/tag/_/...r-rankings
http://realtimerpi.com/football/ncaaf_conf_Men.html

Going forward, who knows what the numbers will look like. I expect the gap will narrow somewhat, but the AAC programs generally have bigger budgets and better attendance, which will make it tough for C-USA to get close.

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  What would be the logic behind the Big12 taking tiny, private Rice over any number of big schools like Memphis, Cincinnati, UH, or BYU? Academic reputation? Sorry guys, but I really don't think so. UT isn't going to recreate the SWC.

Right now, I agree, it's not likely. Longer term, it depends on whether Rice can build a fan base beyond Rice alums. I don't know whether that's possible. We haven't really tried.

(04-09-2014 06:34 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  If getting out of CUSA is the primary goal here, going to the MWC with UNT, UTSA and UTEP is the only way out that I can see.

Short term, yes, that's the only way (either 2 schools or all 4).

AAC is presumably happy with their current line-up, but they could be looking if they lose schools.

(04-09-2014 07:18 PM)RiceDoc Wrote:  BYU would help the TV contracts, but not the recruiting. And BYU is (I think) perceived to be too much of a threat to challenge UT's hold on the kingdom, so that negative about kills any shot they otherwise would have.

There was some discussion of BYU (last year IIRC). They dropped that in a rush to lure Florida State (reportedly unhappy with the ACC's TV deal at the time) and one other from the ACC, but that's off the table with the ACC's new deal.

My hunch is that BYU will happen at some point, along with 1 or 3 others.

I don't think UT has any reason to feel threatened or intimidated by anyone. BYU would eat from it's hands.

(04-09-2014 10:33 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Those rankings between the AAC and CUSA will look much, much closer with Tulane replacing Louisville this year in the AAC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_(fallacy)

AAC is losing Louisville and Rutgers and gaining ECU, Navy, Tulane, and Tulsa.

C-USA is losing ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa and gaining Western Kentucky and Old Dominion. (Charlotte joins in 2015.)

These changes are bad for both conferences.

(04-09-2014 04:49 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 03:01 PM)Bay Area Owl Wrote:  I don't agree with this, because Rice has some intrinsic qualities as a university that still make it more attractive than, say, UH or UCF. All else being equal, universities are going to choose to athletically associate with the more distinguished schools, especially schools with deeper pockets. Assuming Rice gets its ship in order, Rice can put together an attractive case for why its academics, Houston location, and long historical tradition in D1 make it more appealing than commuter schools like UH and UCF. Rice has to get its athletics act together, but Rice's academic reputation still matters for something. TCU's admission into the Big 12 was based on a personal relationship between CDC and DeLoss Dodds. Rice can still get a foot in the door as a distinguished academic school, but it has to then offer an organized and promising athletics program.

But all else is not equal.

For the foreseeable future, I just don't see the Big 12 offering membership directly to any school in a bottom-3 conference. I think they're more likely to remain at 10.

There's another angle we're ignoring, which is that TCU is something of a bellwether. If the Big 12 comes to the conclusion that TCU is not earning its keep, then they will be extremely reluctant to offer membership to any other small private school. So if we want them to consider expansion, then we need TCU to add value.

If they lose 3 schools then they will be forced to invite somebody. If that happens AND Rice has been dominant in C-USA, then I think we'll get a look but not be a shoo-in. This scenario has a lot of variables and their primary objective will be to retain P5 status.

Bingo. I don't see another small private school adding another TV dollars to make the Big 12 want to split their pie further. Unless Bevo is flirting with someone else, they will most likely stay at 10.

(04-09-2014 10:33 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 10:15 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  My hunch is that BYU will happen at some point, along with 1 or 3 others.

I don't think UT has any reason to feel threatened or intimidated by anyone. BYU would eat from it's hands.

No they wouldn't.
If BYU ever came in it would be on their terms. I'm not saying it won't happen. I am saying that *today* I think there's a better chance that Rice is offered and accepts a B12 invite than BYU does.

I also think the number one scenario on B12 expansion list *today* is "nobody".

(04-09-2014 11:19 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 10:33 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Those rankings between the AAC and CUSA will look much, much closer with Tulane replacing Louisville this year in the AAC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_(fallacy)

AAC is losing Louisville and Rutgers and gaining ECU, Navy, Tulane, and Tulsa.

C-USA is losing ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa and gaining Western Kentucky and Old Dominion. (Charlotte joins in 2015.)

These changes are bad for both conferences.

and you gotta know that Connecticut is actively shopping itself......

(04-10-2014 11:22 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 11:19 PM)Gravy Owl Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 10:33 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Those rankings between the AAC and CUSA will look much, much closer with Tulane replacing Louisville this year in the AAC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_(fallacy)

AAC is losing Louisville and Rutgers and gaining ECU, Navy, Tulane, and Tulsa.

C-USA is losing ECU, Tulane, and Tulsa and gaining Western Kentucky and Old Dominion. (Charlotte joins in 2015.)

These changes are bad for both conferences.

and you gotta know that Connecticut is actively shopping itself......

as is Cincy

(04-10-2014 12:02 PM)Pimpa Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 11:22 AM)texowl2 Wrote:  and you gotta know that Connecticut is actively shopping itself......

as is Cincy

Right now, they don't have anywhere to go. But suppose those schools do leave the AAC. What do you think will happen next? Do you think the thing that happens next will benefit Rice?