(03-26-2015 10:42 AM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  AAC stans are hilarious. Our division alone had more 10+ win teams than your entire conference. If our schedule was a "goose-egg," then what do you call yours?

beating your own bad teams on a horrific west division mostly versus teams that can't recruit ...applause

we all agree boise #1 but if you rank quality of teams the last few years the majority of the top are AAC...

(03-26-2015 10:32 AM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 10:24 AM)prisonmike Wrote:  You guys in the AAC get mad so quickly. I am sorry I didn't know there was a thread for realignment talk. My bad. Have fun hoarding all the good teams, beating yourselves up and sitting at home while Boise goes the the Access bowl every year.

Since when is the AAC hoarding all the good teams? Last I checked, the MWC Mountain Division is better than their whole conference.

When you look at the entire picture - on-field results, bowl wins, state of program, recruiting, TV ratings, markets, resources, etc. - IMO, Boise St. is the clear G5 frontrunner. They make and WIN New Year's bowl games against power opponents and grab TV ratings.

But, the next tier of G5 teams favors the American: Cincinnati, UCF, ECU, Memphis, Houston. May be Fresno St. fits in that category too. Utah St., Colorado St., San Diego St., and may be UNLV have the potential to get there - as a program, not just W/L records - but haven't landed yet. Wyoming, Air Force, and New Mexico will never arrive. Neither will Nevada, SJSU, or Hawaii.

The American doesn't have as much dead weight and no poor markets. Greenville, NC (ECU) is probably their worst market, and the Pirates get 50,000 fans in the stadium on gameday.

I think Boise St. ought to make an effort to join the American, but this time for all sports. The lack of a good landing spot for the Olympic sports is really what doomed the Big East venture.

Bring San Diego St., Colorado St., and BYU. So, instead of showcasing televised games against Wyoming, New Mexico, or SJSU, you get matchups like Boise St.-UCF, Boise St.-Memphis, and Boise St.-Houston - on top of the western division games.

In this conference setup, the American would corner the NY6 access bowl bid. As an annual feature in the NY6 lineup, the American would cement itself as a de facto insider.

That's also a minimum 4-bid basketball conference, with the potential for 6 or 7 bids. Bringing Boise St. and BYU to markets like Philadelphia, Dallas, and Tampa instead of Laramie, Reno, and Albuquerque would net a much better TV-deal payday than anything currently enjoyed by any MWC or AAC team.

(03-26-2015 09:44 AM)prisonmike Wrote:  The thought behind all of this is to rethink the G5 conferences (For FB only). Instead of being competitors, poaching from one another, and putting each other down why not strive to exist as one conference together? I mean we only have one spot in the new CFP anyway. I say lets restructure the conferences based on Geography.

My theory is that unless a school is in a conference making ~$20 million in TV money, it doesn't make sense to associate with schools on the other side of the country - at least not via a common conference. Instead, such a school would be best served by forming/joining a small regional conference with likeminded institutions and then scheduling national games as needed. Ideally, conference schools should be able to maximize game attendance and interest by associating with schools in driving distance or, at the very least, with fan bases that overlap/touch. Furthermore, schools would be best served by aligning with other schools of comparable academic stature and values. As such, the advertising aspect of athletics could be maximized.

Therefore, I think that the g5 should split into 8/9 team regional conferences that are fairly homogeneous. I honestly think that such an arrangement would maximize revenue, minimize costs, and improve the gameday atmosphere (i.e. much of the school's value proposition to recruits).

EDIT: Also, to the extent that anyone thinks that TV money is better with bigger conferences, these mini conferences could bundle content and sell it as packages. I'm not sure that it would make a tangible difference, but the option is still there, and the same goes for bowls.

EDIT 2: Finally, I know that these mini conferences would be too small for CCG's, but how much do those really make at the g5 level?

(03-26-2015 12:08 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 09:44 AM)prisonmike Wrote:  The thought behind all of this is to rethink the G5 conferences (For FB only). Instead of being competitors, poaching from one another, and putting each other down why not strive to exist as one conference together? I mean we only have one spot in the new CFP anyway. I say lets restructure the conferences based on Geography.

My theory is that unless a school is in a conference making ~$20 million in TV money, it doesn't make sense to associate with schools on the other side of the country - at least not via a common conference. Instead, such a school would be best served by forming/joining a small regional conference with likeminded institutions and then scheduling national games as needed. Ideally, conference schools should be able to maximize game attendance and interest by associating with schools in driving distance or, at the very least, with fan bases that overlap/touch. Furthermore, schools would be best served by aligning with other schools of comparable academic stature and values. As such, the advertising aspect of athletics could be maximized.

Therefore, I think that the g5 should split into 8/9 team regional conferences that are fairly homogeneous. I honestly think that such an arrangement would maximize revenue, minimize costs, and improve the gameday atmosphere (i.e. much of the school's value proposition to recruits).

EDIT: Also, to the extent that anyone thinks that TV money is better with bigger conferences, these mini conferences could bundle content and sell it as packages. I'm not sure that it would make a tangible difference, but the option is still there, and the same goes for bowls.

EDIT 2: Finally, I know that these mini conferences would be too small for CCG's, but how much do those really make at the g5 level?

CCGs are great for exposure.

One way to realign might be to do kind of what the MWC and CUSA were looking at before the Big East imploded. Have one league, but with 3 geographic conferences. Take the AAC, MWC, Army and 11-17 others (depending on whether you do 12 or 14 team leagues).
12 team model
AAC Mountain West
Hawaii, SDSU, SJSU, Fresno, UNLV, Nevada
Boise, Utah St., Wyoming, CSU, New Mexico, UTEP
AAC Southwest
Air Force, Army, Navy, Tulsa, SMU, Rice
Houston, Tulane, Memphis, Southern Miss, UTSA, La Tech
AAC East
UCF, USF, ECU, Temple, UConn, Cincinnati
N. Illinois, W. Michigan, Toledo, Miami, Ohio, Buffalo

That would leave 6 MAC schools, 11 Sun Belt schools, 8 CUSA schools, UMass and BYU (I'm presuming BYU wouldn't be interested).

(03-26-2015 10:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 10:42 AM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  AAC stans are hilarious. Our division alone had more 10+ win teams than your entire conference. If our schedule was a "goose-egg," then what do you call yours?

beating your own bad teams on a horrific west division

With the AAC West including Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane, I am not sure I would throw stones at the MWC West.

(03-26-2015 01:00 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 10:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 10:42 AM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  AAC stans are hilarious. Our division alone had more 10+ win teams than your entire conference. If our schedule was a "goose-egg," then what do you call yours?

beating your own bad teams on a horrific west division

With the AAC West including Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane, I am not sure I would throw stones at the MWC West.

True. The difference is 2 out of those 3 bad AAC schools hired new coaches as the status quo was not acceptable. In the MW, Norm Chow still has a job and UNLV hired a local high school coach. I just see more money being invested in upgrading programs in the AAC. New stadiums and million dollar+ coaches. Lots of improvements across the board in the AAC. In the MW---that's much more limited. I see big investments from Colorado St and Boise----that's about it. Lets see who has the most improvement in the lower end of their conference in 2015. I think the AAC is going to improve dramatically.

(03-26-2015 01:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 01:00 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 10:48 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 10:42 AM)BoiseStateOfMind Wrote:  AAC stans are hilarious. Our division alone had more 10+ win teams than your entire conference. If our schedule was a "goose-egg," then what do you call yours?

beating your own bad teams on a horrific west division

With the AAC West including Tulsa, SMU, and Tulane, I am not sure I would throw stones at the MWC West.

Yeah. The difference is 2 out of those 3 bad AAC schools hired new coaches as the status quo was not acceptable. In the MW, Norm Chow still has a job and UNLV hired a local high school coach. Lets see who has the most improvement in the lower end of their conference in 2015.

I don't disagree, but in 2014 the AAC West privates were among the worst in FBS.

Tulane wants no part of that terrible conference, I would rather see athletics shut down then play in that dumpster fire. The problem is every G5 school wants so badly to be in the AAC that they try to configure different "dream" scenarios that involve the AAC's demise. Well that is not happening, we will be the apart of the P6 again soon so stop trying to ride the coattails.

(03-26-2015 01:17 PM)GreenWave16 Wrote:  Tulane wants no part of that terrible conference, I would rather see athletics shut down then play in that dumpster fire. The problem is every G5 school wants so badly to be in the AAC that they try to configure different "dream" scenarios that involve the AAC's demise. Well that is not happening, we will be the apart of the P6 again soon so stop trying to ride the coattails.

(03-26-2015 01:17 PM)GreenWave16 Wrote:  The problem is every G5 school wants so badly to be in the AAC that they try to configure different "dream" scenarios that involve the AAC's demise.

LOL, speak for yourself. I'd much rather go independent than ever try to hop into bed with the Bait-and-Switch Conference again. And double-LOL if you actually are under the delusion that the AAC will ever be a power conference. If the MWC with TCU, Utah, and BYU wasn't allowed into the club, they really aren't going to share their prestige with a conference full of teams that strive for 9 wins and the Beef O'Brady Bowl.

What about this?

The AAC and MWC merge into a 24-team super-conference with four 6-team divisions (basically the current structure, but with everything under the American brand). The conference champion gets the NY6 access bowl bid.

The C-USA, MAC, and Sun Belt reorganize into FOUR geographic sub-conferences - all under the "American" banner. The sub-conference champs each play the four last-place teams from the four divisions of the new 24-team American - for a chance to move up. (Similar to Premier League soccer promotion and relegation). These could be bowl games. Winner stays in/moves to the American. Loser stays/moves to the sub-conference.

The $75 million from the CFP is divided as follows:

- $40 million divided equally among all G5 teams (roughly $500-700K per team).
- $24 million divided equally among the 24-team super-conference members ($1 million per team).
- $3 million divided between the two super-conference division winners that don't reach the conference championship game ($1.5 million each)
- $2 million to the super-conference championship game loser
- $6 million to the super-conference champion (who plays in the NY6 bowl game)

This sets up a nice capitalistic system to motivate and reward those schools that put resources into the football program to move up or remain in the super-conference.

24-TEAM "AMERICAN" SUPER-CONFERENCE

AMERICAN EAST
Cincinnati
ECU
Temple
UCF
UConn
USF

AMERICAN SOUTH
Houston
Memphis
Navy
SMU
Tulane
Tulsa

AMERICAN CENTRAL
Air Force
Boise St.
Colorado St.
New Mexico
Utah St.
Wyoming

AMERICAN WEST
Fresno St.
Hawaii
Nevada
SDSU
SJSU
UNLV

Sub-Conference EAST
Akron
Bowling Green
Buffalo
C. Michigan
E. Michigan
Kent St.
Miami(OH)
Ohio
UMass
W. Michigan

Sub-Conference SOUTH
Appalachian St.
Florida International
FAU
Georgia Southern
Georgia St.
Marshall
Old Dominion
South Alabama
Troy

Sub-Conference CENTRAL
Ball St.
LA-Lafayette
LA-Monroe
Middle Tennessee
S. Miss
N. Illinois
Toledo
W. Kentucky

Sub-Conference WEST
Arkansas St.
Idaho
LA Tech
New Mexico St.
North Texas
RICE
Texas St.
UTEP
UTSA

Or, something like that....

(03-26-2015 12:08 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  My theory is that unless a school is in a conference making ~$20 million in TV money, it doesn't make sense to associate with schools on the other side of the country - at least not via a common conference. Instead, such a school would be best served by forming/joining a small regional conference with likeminded institutions and then scheduling national games as needed.

The trouble is - they aren't like-minded. Some schools want tight regionalization - those with limited resources. Those with resources would rather spend a few bucks than to get suffocated with regionalization.
The aren't like-minded academically either. These are educational institutions after all. They vary greatly in mission and devotion to research. And if you don't think academics - selectivity and research - matter, you haven't been paying attention.

(03-26-2015 05:35 PM)YNot Wrote:  24-TEAM "AMERICAN" SUPER-CONFERENCE

AMERICAN EAST
Cincinnati
ECU
Temple
UCF
UConn
USF

AMERICAN SOUTH
Houston
Memphis
Navy
SMU
Tulane
Tulsa

AMERICAN CENTRAL
Air Force
Boise St.
Colorado St.
New Mexico
Utah St.
Wyoming

AMERICAN WEST
Fresno St.
Hawaii
Nevada
SDSU
SJSU
UNLV

This is what I think would work and may be worth more per team as a package than as separate conferences. The reality is these conferences are already shown on NATIONWIDE cable networks---but each conference only coveres HALF the country. So, why not create a NATIONWIDE conference to show on a NATIONAL network.

If a game pitting SDSU vs Fresno is on NBC-Sports, right now, it really only affects MWC fans. If the AAC and MW were one conference, this same game might just generate at least some passing interest in Philly, Houston, Orland, Tampa, Memphis, Dallas, etc. The thing is---the game is going to be showing in those cities anyway because its a national broadcast---but by combining the conference, you have created a larger potential audience. You have created a league that has a "rooting interest" in most every region of he country. You have tied together probably 15 of the top 25 media markets. The synergy of the larger potential audience would make the property a conference in which there is some level of interest virtually EVERYWHERE in the country. The national G5 would be the best known, most recognized, most televised, most followed, and most familiar G5 conference in the nation. It would be familiar to those in the east and west.

For a national cable company, I think a NATIONAL conference could be a significantly valuable property that is worth more as ONE conference than it is as two separate conferences. Frankly, its the only configuration that hasn't been tried.

(03-26-2015 12:08 PM)nzmorange Wrote:  

(03-26-2015 09:44 AM)prisonmike Wrote:  The thought behind all of this is to rethink the G5 conferences (For FB only). Instead of being competitors, poaching from one another, and putting each other down why not strive to exist as one conference together? I mean we only have one spot in the new CFP anyway. I say lets restructure the conferences based on Geography.

My theory is that unless a school is in a conference making ~$20 million in TV money, it doesn't make sense to associate with schools on the other side of the country - at least not via a common conference. Instead, such a school would be best served by forming/joining a small regional conference with likeminded institutions and then scheduling national games as needed. Ideally, conference schools should be able to maximize game attendance and interest by associating with schools in driving distance or, at the very least, with fan bases that overlap/touch. Furthermore, schools would be best served by aligning with other schools of comparable academic stature and values. As such, the advertising aspect of athletics could be maximized.

Therefore, I think that the g5 should split into 8/9 team regional conferences that are fairly homogeneous. I honestly think that such an arrangement would maximize revenue, minimize costs, and improve the gameday atmosphere (i.e. much of the school's value proposition to recruits).

EDIT: Also, to the extent that anyone thinks that TV money is better with bigger conferences, these mini conferences could bundle content and sell it as packages. I'm not sure that it would make a tangible difference, but the option is still there, and the same goes for bowls.

EDIT 2: Finally, I know that these mini conferences would be too small for CCG's, but how much do those really make at the g5 level?

You have to understand, that's exactly what we have. The G5 schools have gravitated together with like minded institutions that they believe are their "peers". As P5's have formed, some G5 have been separated from the nearby regional groups that they considered like minded or peers. Thus, these "left out" schools had to travel farther to find similar schools in similar situations. That's why we have todays geographic mish-mash. The schools that have agreed to be together are together. Your suggesting that groups that have chosen not to be together should---simply be together due to geography---other factors be darned. In some cases it might work, in others, it might not be a great match due to the schools just not seeing the "like minded" part of their geographical grouping.

That's one issue to overcome. The second is money. Some conferences make more than others. If everyone makes the same amount, then the more highly paid will be getting less and the more poorly paid will see a pay increase. So, essentially, the former group is not going to see much value in that---the latter group will be all for the change.

(03-26-2015 09:44 AM)prisonmike Wrote:  The thought behind all of this is to rethink the G5 conferences (For FB only). Instead of being competitors, poaching from one another, and putting each other down why not strive to exist as one conference together? I mean we only have one spot in the new CFP anyway. I say lets restructure the conferences based on Geography. This model would help spread out the talent between the five conferences. So at the end of the year the G5 could present 5 conference champions that are name brand teams and nationally respected. Instead of the CFP just hoping that Boise does well enough to make the Access bowl.

We have 63 teams in the G5. In this model I assume BYU and Army will remain Independent. That leaves us with 61 teams. 5 conferences (4 with 12 and 1 with 13). The current G5 conferences could manage theses new G5 geographic divisions. Each Division would have good markets and good recruiting states.

Here are the new divisions:

G5 West (MWC) (BYU)
West East
1. Hawaii 1. Boise St.
2. San Diego St. 2. Idaho
3. San Jose St. 3. Wyoming
4. Fresno St. 4. Utah St.
5. UNLV 5. Air Force
6. Nevada 6. Colorado St.

G5 SouthWest (CUSA)
West East
1. New Mexico 1. SMU
2. New Mexico St. 2. Houston
3. UTEP 3. Rice
4. Tulsa 4. North Texas
5. UTSA 5. Arkansas St.
6. Texas St. 6. Louisiana Tech

G5 East (AAC)(Army)
North South
1. UMASS 1. Old Dominion
2. UCONN 2. ECU
3. Temple 3. App St.
4. Navy 4. Charlotte
5. Cincinnati 5. Memphis
6. Marshall 6. Middle Tennessee St.
7. Western Kentucky

G5 MidWest (MAC)
West East
1. Northern Illinois 1. Buffalo
2. Ball St. 2. Toledo
3. Western Michigan 3. Akron
4. Central Michigan 4. Bowling Green
5. Eastern Michigan 5. Ohio
6. Miami (OH) 6. Kent St.

G5 SouthEast (SBC)
West East
1. Louisiana-Lafayette 1. South Florida
2. Louisiana Monroe 2. Central Florida
3. Tulane 3. FAU
4. Southern Miss 4. FIU
5. Troy 5. Georgia Southern
6. South Alabama 6. Georgia St.



Thoughts?

I really like the G5 east. Thatd be a really fun league. And although you said it wouldnt carry over to hoops, it would be a good league there too.

Actually I think the biggest problem is that some of the programs want Florida exposure (or Ga), because they recruit there.

(03-26-2015 05:32 PM)YNot Wrote:  What about this?

The AAC and MWC merge into a 24-team super-conference with four 6-team divisions (basically the current structure, but with everything under the American brand). The conference champion gets the NY6 access bowl bid.

Nope. Just like the P5 has some grandfathered programs weaker than the G5 achievers, C-USA, the MAC and Sunbelt have programs stronger than many of the AAC and MWC bottom feeders.

Why would CUSA teams agree to that. Didn't CUSA just finish ranked ahead of the AAC last season in football, and CUSA is outperforming the AAC in basketball so far (was the AAC the only G5 conference whose champion did not win their 1st round game in NCAA?).

Seems to me that the AAC needs to worry a little more about actually performing before they go trying to run college sports. Give it another season or two and there may not even be an AAC based on the results so far.

(03-26-2015 10:06 PM)CurveItAround Wrote:  Why would CUSA teams agree to that. Didn't CUSA just finish ranked ahead of the AAC last season in football, and CUSA is outperforming the AAC in basketball so far (was the AAC the only G5 conference whose champion did not win their 1st round game in NCAA?).

Seems to me that the AAC needs to worry a little more about actually performing before they go trying to run college sports. Give it another season or two and there may not even be an AAC based on the results so far.

Really? Who won a first round tournament game is the measuring stick?

When exactly was the last time a current CUSA school won a National Championship in basketball?