(03-05-2015 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:12 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 07:59 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 04:00 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(02-23-2015 07:26 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  We are different than the G4. I see nothing wrong with that.

In what way are you different/better than the MWC?

Academics, financial resources, market size, attendance ... and I'd bet my pension that our computer rankings in FB will (on average) be superior in most years. The Big East used to blow away the MWC in the computer rankings every year. Losing Syracuse & Pitt and picking up UCF, ECU, and Memphis won't hurt us.

We can also talk about BB. We have UConn, Cincinnati, Temple, Memphis, and a pretty good SMU program. The MWC isn't even on the same planet with us in BB.

I don't see a whole lot of difference in the two...

Rank Team Conf W-L Percentile
23 SMU AAC 23-6 6.55%
28 San Diego St. MWC 23-7 7.98%
36 Cincinnati AAC 21-9 10.26%
40 Boise St. MWC 23-7 11.40%
56 Connecticut AAC 17-11 15.95%
61 Temple AAC 20-9 17.38%
65 Colorado St. MWC 25-5 18.52%
74 Tulsa AAC 21-8 21.08%
85 Memphis AAC 17-12 24.22%
99 UNLV MWC 16-14 28.21%
114 Utah St. MWC 18-11 32.48%
118 Wyoming MWC 22-8 33.62%
129 New Mexico MWC 14-15 36.75%
191 Fresno St. MWC 15-15 54.42%
202 East Carolina AAC 13-16 57.55%
215 Air Force MWC 13-16 61.25%
228 Houston AAC 11-18 64.96%
229 Tulane AAC 14-15 65.24%
260 Nevada MWC 9-20 74.07%
271 South Florida AAC 9-21 77.21%
278 UCF AAC 12-17 79.20%
348 San Jose St. MWC 2-27 99.15%

Told you---the main difference is budgets--Both are well above CUSA, MAC, and Sunbelt. The AAC is even higher than the MW.

UConn--63.4 million #48
UCF--41.2 million #61
USF-45 million #57
Temple--44 million
Navy---not avail (estimated 37-38 million, similar to Army and Air Force)
Cinci--61.9 million #51
Memphis--46.3 million #56
Houston--42 million #60
Tulsa--couldn't find anything on Tulsa, but they seemed competitive vs many of the same teams while in CUSA. I assume the budget is similar.
ECU--35.8 million #68
SMU---52 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today
Tulane--29.4 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today.

Boise--43.2 million #59
Utah St--23.6 million #103
Fresno--33.7 million #71
San Jose St--25.8 million #98
UNLV--64.5 million #46
New Mexico--44.3 million #58
Air Force--39.4 million #63
Wyoming--29.7 million #75
Colorado St---34.7 million #69
Nevada--26.6 million #93
SDSU--39.2 million #62
Hawaii---37 million #65

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

Temple budget figure from here
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

SMU and Tulane budget amounts from 2 years ago obtained from here

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...money.html

And those budgets didn't translate into a better football conference in 2014

(03-05-2015 03:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:12 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 07:59 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 04:00 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  In what way are you different/better than the MWC?

Academics, financial resources, market size, attendance ... and I'd bet my pension that our computer rankings in FB will (on average) be superior in most years. The Big East used to blow away the MWC in the computer rankings every year. Losing Syracuse & Pitt and picking up UCF, ECU, and Memphis won't hurt us.

We can also talk about BB. We have UConn, Cincinnati, Temple, Memphis, and a pretty good SMU program. The MWC isn't even on the same planet with us in BB.

I don't see a whole lot of difference in the two...

Rank Team Conf W-L Percentile
23 SMU AAC 23-6 6.55%
28 San Diego St. MWC 23-7 7.98%
36 Cincinnati AAC 21-9 10.26%
40 Boise St. MWC 23-7 11.40%
56 Connecticut AAC 17-11 15.95%
61 Temple AAC 20-9 17.38%
65 Colorado St. MWC 25-5 18.52%
74 Tulsa AAC 21-8 21.08%
85 Memphis AAC 17-12 24.22%
99 UNLV MWC 16-14 28.21%
114 Utah St. MWC 18-11 32.48%
118 Wyoming MWC 22-8 33.62%
129 New Mexico MWC 14-15 36.75%
191 Fresno St. MWC 15-15 54.42%
202 East Carolina AAC 13-16 57.55%
215 Air Force MWC 13-16 61.25%
228 Houston AAC 11-18 64.96%
229 Tulane AAC 14-15 65.24%
260 Nevada MWC 9-20 74.07%
271 South Florida AAC 9-21 77.21%
278 UCF AAC 12-17 79.20%
348 San Jose St. MWC 2-27 99.15%

Told you---the main difference is budgets--Both are well above CUSA, MAC, and Sunbelt. The AAC is even higher than the MW.

UConn--63.4 million #48
UCF--41.2 million #61
USF-45 million #57
Temple--44 million
Navy---not avail (estimated 37-38 million, similar to Army and Air Force)
Cinci--61.9 million #51
Memphis--46.3 million #56
Houston--42 million #60
Tulsa--couldn't find anything on Tulsa, but they seemed competitive vs many of the same teams while in CUSA. I assume the budget is similar.
ECU--35.8 million #68
SMU---52 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today
Tulane--29.4 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today.

Boise--43.2 million #59
Utah St--23.6 million #103
Fresno--33.7 million #71
San Jose St--25.8 million #98
UNLV--64.5 million #46
New Mexico--44.3 million #58
Air Force--39.4 million #63
Wyoming--29.7 million #75
Colorado St---34.7 million #69
Nevada--26.6 million #93
SDSU--39.2 million #62
Hawaii---37 million #65

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

Temple budget figure from here
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

SMU and Tulane budget amounts from 2 years ago obtained from here

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...money.html

And those budgets didn't translate into a better football conference in 2014

Obviously, the highest budget in football doesn't win every year. But those strong budgets did allow the 3 AAC teams looking for new coaches to hire some of the top coaching prospects in the nation. Over time, the schools with bigger budgets seem to do better than the rest.

(03-05-2015 04:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 03:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:12 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 07:59 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Academics, financial resources, market size, attendance ... and I'd bet my pension that our computer rankings in FB will (on average) be superior in most years. The Big East used to blow away the MWC in the computer rankings every year. Losing Syracuse & Pitt and picking up UCF, ECU, and Memphis won't hurt us.

We can also talk about BB. We have UConn, Cincinnati, Temple, Memphis, and a pretty good SMU program. The MWC isn't even on the same planet with us in BB.

I don't see a whole lot of difference in the two...

Rank Team Conf W-L Percentile
23 SMU AAC 23-6 6.55%
28 San Diego St. MWC 23-7 7.98%
36 Cincinnati AAC 21-9 10.26%
40 Boise St. MWC 23-7 11.40%
56 Connecticut AAC 17-11 15.95%
61 Temple AAC 20-9 17.38%
65 Colorado St. MWC 25-5 18.52%
74 Tulsa AAC 21-8 21.08%
85 Memphis AAC 17-12 24.22%
99 UNLV MWC 16-14 28.21%
114 Utah St. MWC 18-11 32.48%
118 Wyoming MWC 22-8 33.62%
129 New Mexico MWC 14-15 36.75%
191 Fresno St. MWC 15-15 54.42%
202 East Carolina AAC 13-16 57.55%
215 Air Force MWC 13-16 61.25%
228 Houston AAC 11-18 64.96%
229 Tulane AAC 14-15 65.24%
260 Nevada MWC 9-20 74.07%
271 South Florida AAC 9-21 77.21%
278 UCF AAC 12-17 79.20%
348 San Jose St. MWC 2-27 99.15%

Told you---the main difference is budgets--Both are well above CUSA, MAC, and Sunbelt. The AAC is even higher than the MW.

UConn--63.4 million #48
UCF--41.2 million #61
USF-45 million #57
Temple--44 million
Navy---not avail (estimated 37-38 million, similar to Army and Air Force)
Cinci--61.9 million #51
Memphis--46.3 million #56
Houston--42 million #60
Tulsa--couldn't find anything on Tulsa, but they seemed competitive vs many of the same teams while in CUSA. I assume the budget is similar.
ECU--35.8 million #68
SMU---52 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today
Tulane--29.4 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today.

Boise--43.2 million #59
Utah St--23.6 million #103
Fresno--33.7 million #71
San Jose St--25.8 million #98
UNLV--64.5 million #46
New Mexico--44.3 million #58
Air Force--39.4 million #63
Wyoming--29.7 million #75
Colorado St---34.7 million #69
Nevada--26.6 million #93
SDSU--39.2 million #62
Hawaii---37 million #65

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

Temple budget figure from here
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

SMU and Tulane budget amounts from 2 years ago obtained from here

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...money.html

And those budgets didn't translate into a better football conference in 2014

The highest budget in football doesn't win every year. Those strong budgets did allow the 3 AAC teams looking for new coaches to hire some of the top coaching prospects in the nation. Over time, the schools with bigger budgets seem to do better than the rest.

So then a better measure would be football budgets, especially adjusted for scholarship costs. UNLV has the highest budget of all, but has been to what, one bowl game in most players lifetime?

(03-05-2015 10:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 09:38 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 09:27 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 07:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Not only that, though. The top AAC teams were pretty soft too. The three AAC co-champs went 1-2 in bowl games, with two of them losing decisively to bad ACC teams, and the one that won needed a 53-yard field goal at the buzzer to send their game into OT before they could win. And fourth-place finisher ECU lost to a basket-case Florida team in their bowl game.

So you combine a soft top with an awful bottom, and you get ... the 3rd place G5 conference.

Wouldn't call the nc state win decisive but that's me. The first half of the game, now that was a decisive beat down.

Come on. NC State led 34-13 with 12 minutes to go in the game. UCF scored a garbage TD with a minute and change left to make the final score more respectable, but this game wasn't in doubt almost the whole second half.

State ran far more effectively and threw far more effectively, they chewed up a defense that was regarded as one of the best in the AAC. Heck, NC State had 100+ more yards despite playing the whole 4th quarter in a shell while UCF flung the ball around desperately. Outplayed UCF in every facet.

I don't disagree that a lethargic and unmotivated UCF was outplayed thoroughly but the final score was 34-27 and an onside recovery away from a tie. UCF has always played back close even when we were getting trounced, it's our MO.

Funny, I remember last year lots of UCF fans getting up in arms and taking extreme umbrage at the notion that you upset Baylor in the Fiesta in part because Baylor was disappointed/unmotivated by having to face a no-name AAC opponent in their big BCS bowl game. But i assume you weren't one of those.

No I wasn't, I am not a holier than thou individual, but a win is a win and a loss is a loss. Not everyone who disagrees with you deserves condescension.

(03-05-2015 04:29 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 04:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 03:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:12 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  I don't see a whole lot of difference in the two...

Rank Team Conf W-L Percentile
23 SMU AAC 23-6 6.55%
28 San Diego St. MWC 23-7 7.98%
36 Cincinnati AAC 21-9 10.26%
40 Boise St. MWC 23-7 11.40%
56 Connecticut AAC 17-11 15.95%
61 Temple AAC 20-9 17.38%
65 Colorado St. MWC 25-5 18.52%
74 Tulsa AAC 21-8 21.08%
85 Memphis AAC 17-12 24.22%
99 UNLV MWC 16-14 28.21%
114 Utah St. MWC 18-11 32.48%
118 Wyoming MWC 22-8 33.62%
129 New Mexico MWC 14-15 36.75%
191 Fresno St. MWC 15-15 54.42%
202 East Carolina AAC 13-16 57.55%
215 Air Force MWC 13-16 61.25%
228 Houston AAC 11-18 64.96%
229 Tulane AAC 14-15 65.24%
260 Nevada MWC 9-20 74.07%
271 South Florida AAC 9-21 77.21%
278 UCF AAC 12-17 79.20%
348 San Jose St. MWC 2-27 99.15%

Told you---the main difference is budgets--Both are well above CUSA, MAC, and Sunbelt. The AAC is even higher than the MW.

UConn--63.4 million #48
UCF--41.2 million #61
USF-45 million #57
Temple--44 million
Navy---not avail (estimated 37-38 million, similar to Army and Air Force)
Cinci--61.9 million #51
Memphis--46.3 million #56
Houston--42 million #60
Tulsa--couldn't find anything on Tulsa, but they seemed competitive vs many of the same teams while in CUSA. I assume the budget is similar.
ECU--35.8 million #68
SMU---52 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today
Tulane--29.4 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today.

Boise--43.2 million #59
Utah St--23.6 million #103
Fresno--33.7 million #71
San Jose St--25.8 million #98
UNLV--64.5 million #46
New Mexico--44.3 million #58
Air Force--39.4 million #63
Wyoming--29.7 million #75
Colorado St---34.7 million #69
Nevada--26.6 million #93
SDSU--39.2 million #62
Hawaii---37 million #65

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

Temple budget figure from here
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

SMU and Tulane budget amounts from 2 years ago obtained from here

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...money.html

And those budgets didn't translate into a better football conference in 2014

The highest budget in football doesn't win every year. Those strong budgets did allow the 3 AAC teams looking for new coaches to hire some of the top coaching prospects in the nation. Over time, the schools with bigger budgets seem to do better than the rest.

So then a better measure would be football budgets, especially adjusted for scholarship costs. UNLV has the highest budget of all, but has been to what, one bowl game in most players lifetime?

There always exceptions to the rule. If you spend it unwisely, money wont help much. Didn't they just hire a local high school coach? That said, it seems they have had a pretty good run in basketball. Perhaps thats their priority. Plus, I know the UNLV budget figure could be a bit misleading as it includes 40-50 million in income from the Thomas Mack center that has nothing to do with UNLV sports activities---its just arena rental and catering. The unique nature of the Las Vegas tourism and convention industry makes the Thomas Mack Center a cash cow. I'm not sure how these TM income and expenses are accounted for in these budgets. In other words, a lot of that income and spending may have nothing to do with putting teams on the field---it could just be overhead and employee expenses connected with running a major convention center.

(03-05-2015 04:47 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 04:29 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 04:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 03:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Told you---the main difference is budgets--Both are well above CUSA, MAC, and Sunbelt. The AAC is even higher than the MW.

UConn--63.4 million #48
UCF--41.2 million #61
USF-45 million #57
Temple--44 million
Navy---not avail (estimated 37-38 million, similar to Army and Air Force)
Cinci--61.9 million #51
Memphis--46.3 million #56
Houston--42 million #60
Tulsa--couldn't find anything on Tulsa, but they seemed competitive vs many of the same teams while in CUSA. I assume the budget is similar.
ECU--35.8 million #68
SMU---52 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today
Tulane--29.4 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today.

Boise--43.2 million #59
Utah St--23.6 million #103
Fresno--33.7 million #71
San Jose St--25.8 million #98
UNLV--64.5 million #46
New Mexico--44.3 million #58
Air Force--39.4 million #63
Wyoming--29.7 million #75
Colorado St---34.7 million #69
Nevada--26.6 million #93
SDSU--39.2 million #62
Hawaii---37 million #65

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

Temple budget figure from here
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

SMU and Tulane budget amounts from 2 years ago obtained from here

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...money.html

And those budgets didn't translate into a better football conference in 2014

The highest budget in football doesn't win every year. Those strong budgets did allow the 3 AAC teams looking for new coaches to hire some of the top coaching prospects in the nation. Over time, the schools with bigger budgets seem to do better than the rest.

So then a better measure would be football budgets, especially adjusted for scholarship costs. UNLV has the highest budget of all, but has been to what, one bowl game in most players lifetime?

There always exceptions to the rule. If you spend it unwisely, money wont help much. Didn't they just hire a local high school coach? That said, it seems they have had a pretty good run in basketball. Perhaps thats their priority. Plus, I know the UNLV budget could be a bit misleading as it includes 4-50 million in income from the Thomas Mack center that has nothing to do with UNLV sports activities---its just arena rental and catering. I'm not sure how that's accounted for.

That is why we need just football budgets.

(03-05-2015 04:40 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 10:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 09:38 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:10 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 09:27 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Wouldn't call the nc state win decisive but that's me. The first half of the game, now that was a decisive beat down.

Come on. NC State led 34-13 with 12 minutes to go in the game. UCF scored a garbage TD with a minute and change left to make the final score more respectable, but this game wasn't in doubt almost the whole second half.

State ran far more effectively and threw far more effectively, they chewed up a defense that was regarded as one of the best in the AAC. Heck, NC State had 100+ more yards despite playing the whole 4th quarter in a shell while UCF flung the ball around desperately. Outplayed UCF in every facet.

I don't disagree that a lethargic and unmotivated UCF was outplayed thoroughly but the final score was 34-27 and an onside recovery away from a tie. UCF has always played back close even when we were getting trounced, it's our MO.

Funny, I remember last year lots of UCF fans getting up in arms and taking extreme umbrage at the notion that you upset Baylor in the Fiesta in part because Baylor was disappointed/unmotivated by having to face a no-name AAC opponent in their big BCS bowl game. But i assume you weren't one of those.

No I wasn't, I am not a holier than thou individual, but a win is a win and a loss is a loss. Not everyone who disagrees with you deserves condescension.

No condescension, but just not convinced that anyone can say NC State's win over UCF wasn't decisive. Every place you look - scoreboard or stats - it says it was.

Nothing like, say, Memphis's win over BYU, or Houston over Pitt.

(03-05-2015 09:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, but as Bragg and i sussed out, seems like for this conference-synergy effect to work, it seems like it will only happen for Power conferences. In 1986, the Big East wasn't just a "power" basketball conference, it was the very best conference, and one that was the darling of the basketball media world too. Calhoun was thus able to make a real credible claim to recruits about the competition they would face at UConn, and the media attention as well.

Not just a power conference. The A-number-one top conference at the time.

A new coach at Texas Tech or Cal or Purdue isn't going to get far recruiting based on the strength of their conference. Neither will a new football coach at U-Va.

(03-05-2015 04:29 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 04:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 03:59 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:12 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  I don't see a whole lot of difference in the two...

Rank Team Conf W-L Percentile
23 SMU AAC 23-6 6.55%
28 San Diego St. MWC 23-7 7.98%
36 Cincinnati AAC 21-9 10.26%
40 Boise St. MWC 23-7 11.40%
56 Connecticut AAC 17-11 15.95%
61 Temple AAC 20-9 17.38%
65 Colorado St. MWC 25-5 18.52%
74 Tulsa AAC 21-8 21.08%
85 Memphis AAC 17-12 24.22%
99 UNLV MWC 16-14 28.21%
114 Utah St. MWC 18-11 32.48%
118 Wyoming MWC 22-8 33.62%
129 New Mexico MWC 14-15 36.75%
191 Fresno St. MWC 15-15 54.42%
202 East Carolina AAC 13-16 57.55%
215 Air Force MWC 13-16 61.25%
228 Houston AAC 11-18 64.96%
229 Tulane AAC 14-15 65.24%
260 Nevada MWC 9-20 74.07%
271 South Florida AAC 9-21 77.21%
278 UCF AAC 12-17 79.20%
348 San Jose St. MWC 2-27 99.15%

Told you---the main difference is budgets--Both are well above CUSA, MAC, and Sunbelt. The AAC is even higher than the MW.

UConn--63.4 million #48
UCF--41.2 million #61
USF-45 million #57
Temple--44 million
Navy---not avail (estimated 37-38 million, similar to Army and Air Force)
Cinci--61.9 million #51
Memphis--46.3 million #56
Houston--42 million #60
Tulsa--couldn't find anything on Tulsa, but they seemed competitive vs many of the same teams while in CUSA. I assume the budget is similar.
ECU--35.8 million #68
SMU---52 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today
Tulane--29.4 million in 2012-2013, likely higher today.

Boise--43.2 million #59
Utah St--23.6 million #103
Fresno--33.7 million #71
San Jose St--25.8 million #98
UNLV--64.5 million #46
New Mexico--44.3 million #58
Air Force--39.4 million #63
Wyoming--29.7 million #75
Colorado St---34.7 million #69
Nevada--26.6 million #93
SDSU--39.2 million #62
Hawaii---37 million #65

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

Temple budget figure from here
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/s...nCT79I5_WQ

SMU and Tulane budget amounts from 2 years ago obtained from here

http://www.nola.com/tulane/index.ssf/201...money.html

And those budgets didn't translate into a better football conference in 2014

The highest budget in football doesn't win every year. Those strong budgets did allow the 3 AAC teams looking for new coaches to hire some of the top coaching prospects in the nation. Over time, the schools with bigger budgets seem to do better than the rest.

So then a better measure would be football budgets, especially adjusted for scholarship costs. UNLV has the highest budget of all, but has been to what, one bowl game in most players lifetime?

UNLV is an exception.

Nevada is not exactly a state that is very big on high school or college football.

Budgets do not translate to wins in all situations but budgets do often translate into better coaching hires, better facilities, and better stadiums. Which again does not grantee success on a year to year basis, but increases the chance of being successful.

(03-05-2015 01:13 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Methinks AAC teams are getting big in the britches... you're still a G5 school kiddos, just like us so don't forget that. Unless you're Cincinnati, no AAC team has much bragging rights in football

Niu is talking crap. Fill in more than 13k in the stands and don't play a Mac schedule and we can talk

(03-06-2015 01:30 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:13 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Methinks AAC teams are getting big in the britches... you're still a G5 school kiddos, just like us so don't forget that. Unless you're Cincinnati, no AAC team has much bragging rights in football

Niu is talking crap. Fill in more than 13k in the stands and don't play a Mac schedule and we can talk

Orange. Bowl.

(03-05-2015 09:33 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 08:40 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:29 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-04-2015 11:34 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Our conference is just 20 months old. Things will slowly get better. Other conferences have been together much, much longer than that.

This is an interesting idea: Do conferences somehow 'get better' over time? Is there a synergy effect, or is a "conference" never more nor less than the sum of its schools?

Maybe if a conference develops a rep as the best, then lesser schools within it can attract more talent. E.g., maybe over the past 5 years, schools like Ole Miss and Mississippi State have been able to sign better recruits than in the past by being able to say "you'll be playing in the best conference, the SEC"?

Maybe?

The classic case:

Jim Calhoun arrived at UConn in 1986. Prior to that, we were always .500 or below (usually below) in the Big East. He started recruiting by telling the kids:

1) "You'll get to play the best in college BB, like Georgetown and Syracuse".
2) "You'll be on ESPN".

Yes, but as Bragg and i sussed out, seems like for this conference-synergy effect to work, it seems like it will only happen for Power conferences. In 1986, the Big East wasn't just a "power" basketball conference, it was the very best conference, and one that was the darling of the basketball media world too. Calhoun was thus able to make a real credible claim to recruits about the competition they would face at UConn, and the media attention as well.

The AAC situation is far different. In football, we're not only not the best conference, we're not in the P5, and aren't even the best G5 conference. And as far as media, we're an afterthought.

Thus, it's far less likely that a AAC coach will be able to land quality recruits by saying "you'll be playing in the AAC" ... Recruits probably lump the G5 together, just like the media does. And even if a clever AAC coach can convince a recruit that the AAC has more to offer than C-USA, that is hardly going to land the kind of recruit that will make the AAC a significantly better league.

Keep pulling saregrin ratings out of you excel sheet and point to that as your proof. The AAC is the best g5 conference period. There is a reason we are positioned the way we are and we are the "feeder" conference as someone mentioned. Keep toting the party line quo. Usf has been terrible and you don't have a dog in the fight so you will just blame it on the conf. With regard to nc state they were a different team with jacoby brisett. He beat us. We lost our starting running back, qb, most of the oline, and during the game our starting safety and corner. We had frosh getting their first real minutes in a bowl game in the secondary because of injuries and brisett capitalized on mistakes. I really wish you would stop identifying yourself with our conf because you really are not a fan

(03-06-2015 01:30 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 01:30 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:13 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Methinks AAC teams are getting big in the britches... you're still a G5 school kiddos, just like us so don't forget that. Unless you're Cincinnati, no AAC team has much bragging rights in football

Niu is talking crap. Fill in more than 13k in the stands and don't play a Mac schedule and we can talk

Orange. Bowl.

Yup. Orange bowl and what happened. Again your program is not on the same level in any measure.

(03-06-2015 01:42 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 01:30 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 01:30 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:13 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Methinks AAC teams are getting big in the britches... you're still a G5 school kiddos, just like us so don't forget that. Unless you're Cincinnati, no AAC team has much bragging rights in football

Niu is talking crap. Fill in more than 13k in the stands and don't play a Mac schedule and we can talk

Orange. Bowl.

Yup. Orange bowl and what happened. Again your program is not on the same level in any measure.

Ummmm it was a game until the 4th quarter? I'd rather lose the big game than never be in it

(03-06-2015 01:41 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  Keep pulling saregrin ratings out of you excel sheet and point to that as your proof. The AAC is the best g5 conference period. There is a reason we are positioned the way we are and we are the "feeder" conference as someone mentioned. Keep toting the party line quo. Usf has been terrible and you don't have a dog in the fight so you will just blame it on the conf. With regard to nc state they were a different team with jacoby brisett. He beat us. We lost our starting running back, qb, most of the oline, and during the game our starting safety and corner. We had frosh getting their first real minutes in a bowl game in the secondary because of injuries and brisett capitalized on mistakes. I really wish you would stop identifying yourself with our conf because you really are not a fan

Keep mouthing the Aresco propaganda about how good we are all you want, but the fact of the matter is that we were the THIRD best G5 conference in football this past year. That's not according to Sagarin, that was our official result according to the CFP itself, which ranked us 3rd, and gave us 3rd place money out of the $15 million performance fund.

That's reality. And since there has only been one year of the G5, that makes us, as of now, the 3rd best G5 football conference.

As for who the "feeder" conference is, first, we don't know who the G5 feeder conference for future P5 expansion will be, because there hasn't been any expansion since the G5 was formed. But second, even if we are, that isn't a property of the AAC, but rather the brand-value of schools in our conference.

That said, if you want to say we are the most valuable G5 conference, well, that's true, because our media deal is, as of now, and despite how sucky it is, tops in money for the G5. We get paid more for our games than any other G5 conference. Actually, there is a caveat to this, as the Big East gets paid more media money than us. So the Big East is actually the most valuable non-P5 conference, but of the G5 conferences that play football, we are most valuable.

But if by "best" you mean on the football field, well, that's not true, we're 3rd best.

I identify with the AAC because my school plays in it. But, I would prefer that my school would stop playing in it as soon as possible and join a P5 league. Does that make me "not a fan"? I'd say it makes me just like you.

(03-06-2015 01:56 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 01:42 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 01:30 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 01:30 AM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 01:13 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  Methinks AAC teams are getting big in the britches... you're still a G5 school kiddos, just like us so don't forget that. Unless you're Cincinnati, no AAC team has much bragging rights in football

Niu is talking crap. Fill in more than 13k in the stands and don't play a Mac schedule and we can talk

Orange. Bowl.

Yup. Orange bowl and what happened. Again your program is not on the same level in any measure.

Ummmm it was a game until the 4th quarter? I'd rather lose the big game than never be in it

Be honest- despite what the scoreboard said, it wasn't a game. From the opening minutes, there was literally no doubt about who would win.

The AAC is a bunch of wannabes who deep down know that, but desperately try to pronounce otherwise.

AAC fell right in the middle of the G5 in football with the official rankings behind MWC and Conference USA. They are also running in the bottom 10 of basketball RPI as a conference with the MAC right behind them. Their TV payout is withing a few hundred thousand of the MWC, MAC, and CUSA and $20 million from any cartel 5 conference. The AAC is as G5 as it gets in every category. Those are the facts.

.

(03-06-2015 08:45 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  The AAC is a bunch of wannabes who deep down know that, but desperately try to pronounce otherwise.

AAC fell right in the middle of the G5 in football with the official rankings behind MWC and Conference USA. They are also running in the bottom 10 of basketball RPI as a conference with the MAC right behind them. Their TV payout is withing a few hundred thousand of the MWC, MAC, and CUSA and $20 million from any cartel 5 conference. The AAC is as G5 as it gets in every category. Those are the facts.

Wish I could disagree, but everything you say is correct. In terms of results, our first year as a G5 conference has been a disaster. Football was awful, as I never thought we'd EVER finish worse than second among the G5 during the whole 12 years of the CFP. And in basketball, while the ultimate jury of March Madness is still out, so far we have been underwhelming as well. And, as you note, our media deal, though the most valuable of the G5, is obviously far, far closer to G5 level than P5 level.

Verdict: Despite Aresco propaganda about us being a "power" conference or a "tweener" league, our performance this year has been nothing but generic G5. We haven't separated ourselves from the G5 in any way. We aren't even a "tweener" league. Just plain old G5.

That's reality. Now can we improve on that? I sure hope so. But as of now, that's all it is, hope.

(03-06-2015 08:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 08:45 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  The AAC is a bunch of wannabes who deep down know that, but desperately try to pronounce otherwise.

AAC fell right in the middle of the G5 in football with the official rankings behind MWC and Conference USA. They are also running in the bottom 10 of basketball RPI as a conference with the MAC right behind them. Their TV payout is withing a few hundred thousand of the MWC, MAC, and CUSA and $20 million from any cartel 5 conference. The AAC is as G5 as it gets in every category. Those are the facts.

Wish I could disagree, but everything you say is correct. In terms of results, our first year as a G5 conference has been a disaster. Football was awful, as I never thought we'd EVER finish worse than second among the G5 during the whole 12 years of the CFP. And in basketball, while the ultimate jury of March Madness is still out, so far we have been underwhelming as well. And, as you note, our media deal, though the most valuable of the G5, is obviously far, far closer to G5 level than P5 level.

Verdict: Despite Aresco propaganda about us being a "power" conference or a "tweener" league, our performance this year has been nothing but generic G5. We haven't separated ourselves from the G5 in any way. We aren't even a "tweener" league. Just plain old G5.

That's reality. Now can we improve on that? I sure hope so. But as of now, that's all it is, hope.

Wow, a perfectly logical and sensible post... I'm impressed. Hats off to you for taking the high ground

(03-06-2015 09:37 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 08:53 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-06-2015 08:45 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  The AAC is a bunch of wannabes who deep down know that, but desperately try to pronounce otherwise.

AAC fell right in the middle of the G5 in football with the official rankings behind MWC and Conference USA. They are also running in the bottom 10 of basketball RPI as a conference with the MAC right behind them. Their TV payout is withing a few hundred thousand of the MWC, MAC, and CUSA and $20 million from any cartel 5 conference. The AAC is as G5 as it gets in every category. Those are the facts.

Wish I could disagree, but everything you say is correct. In terms of results, our first year as a G5 conference has been a disaster. Football was awful, as I never thought we'd EVER finish worse than second among the G5 during the whole 12 years of the CFP. And in basketball, while the ultimate jury of March Madness is still out, so far we have been underwhelming as well. And, as you note, our media deal, though the most valuable of the G5, is obviously far, far closer to G5 level than P5 level.

Verdict: Despite Aresco propaganda about us being a "power" conference or a "tweener" league, our performance this year has been nothing but generic G5. We haven't separated ourselves from the G5 in any way. We aren't even a "tweener" league. Just plain old G5.

That's reality. Now can we improve on that? I sure hope so. But as of now, that's all it is, hope.

Wow, a perfectly logical and sensible post... I'm impressed. Hats off to you for taking the high ground

Right now Aresco has to be sweating bullets. There is a darn good chance the AAC may just get three and possibly only two teams in the NCAA tournament. Tulsa needs to beat SMU and Temple needs to beat UCONN to stay on the bubble.

Imagine after all the campaigning about how the AAC should be the P6. Football came third in the G5. I assumed AAC basketball would be the ace in the hole. The AAC could only get two bids in basketball. The Big East is looking at 6 and the MWC is also looking at 3 to 4. Possibly CUSA could have two teams. Talk about a PR nightmare.