(03-07-2016 07:45 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  UMass couldn't nut up to join the MAC....

True. But what school out there other than a UMass would make it so obvious that they would join under those circumstances? Byu and Army could join whenever they wanted, so they wouldn't care about an expansion.

(03-07-2016 07:17 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:00 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 04:57 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  From Aresco's quote it sounds as if there is a #11 who they would quickly add if there was a defection. There does not appear to be a #12 at this time. Wonder who #11 is.

UMass? San Diego State?

Best hope is Army. UMass would most certainly be chomping at the bit to be #12.

UMASS would make sense as an addition but only if UConn is still a conference mate. They are a project but UConn gives them an antagonist to push the development they need.

Im not in any way saying UMass would be a good move---I'm just saying they would jump instantly at the opportunity to join.

In truth---its tougher if we just lose one. If you lose 2, standing pat at 10 works just fine.

If we lose one, the best option is Army. After that, the next best option is to go to 14 with Army+Air Force+Colorado St. I think there is a small chance that might actually fly.

If none of those options are available, the remaining choices are all pretty bad and offer no immediate up side beyond providing a warm body for #12. Despite the difficulties of an 11 team conference with unbalanced divisions---I might think standing pat at 11 could still be the best bet. Otherwise your adding S Miss, or UMass, or Marshall, or Old Dominion, or some other random that just soaks up a full share and doesn't really add any real value for the renegotiation that is right around the corner.

(03-07-2016 08:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 07:17 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:00 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 04:57 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  From Aresco's quote it sounds as if there is a #11 who they would quickly add if there was a defection. There does not appear to be a #12 at this time. Wonder who #11 is.

UMass? San Diego State?

Best hope is Army. UMass would most certainly be chomping at the bit to be #12.

UMASS would make sense as an addition but only if UConn is still a conference mate. They are a project but UConn gives them an antagonist to push the development they need.

Im not in any way saying UMass would be a good move---I'm just saying they would jump instantly at the opportunity to join.

In truth---its tougher if we just lose one. If you lose 2, standing pat at 10 works just fine.

If we lose one, the best option is Army. After that, the next best option is to go to 14 with Army+Air Force+Colorado St. I think there is a small chance that might actually fly.

If none of those options are available, the remaining choices are all pretty bad and offer no immediate up side beyond providing a warm body for #12. Despite the difficulties of an 11 team conference with unbalanced divisions---I might think standing pat at 11 could still be the best bet. Otherwise your adding S Miss, or UMass, or Marshall, or Old Dominion, or some other random that just soaks up a full share and doesn't really add any real value for the renegotiation that is right around the corner.

UMAss football only? Just because it lets you stand pat long term, while filling the #12 spot for football. Not that UMAss is any prize, but they'd take an arrangement where you could do to them what the Sun Belt did to Idaho and NMSU. I'm not sure that you can do a CCG with 11, scheduling a round-robin. I know you can't with 13--the SEC found that out when they had A&M and before they got Mizzou.

So...
AAC EAst: UMass, UConn, Temple, ECU, USF, UCF
AAC West: NAvy, Cincy, Memphis, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, SMU (6 of 7)

I doubt AAC would stay at ten if they could maybe keep the money still with adding UMass and Aresco pleading with Navy to get Army on board.

(03-07-2016 05:37 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:33 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 04:52 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 04:43 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Can a G5 conference with 10 teams have a football championship game just like the B12 can?

Yes that's what deregulation meant.

Not exactly correct. What the amendment said was that a conference could hold a CCG with less than 12 teams, and no divisions, ONLY if they played a round robin. Right now, the AAC plays 8 league games.They would have to stay at 10 AND play a round robin, thus 9 league games, in order to play a CCG.

If somehow they went to 11, I don't see how they could play a RR, which would require 10 conference games.

His league has no financial penalties if a team would leave. Rather, a price would be negotiated. If the American loses one team, “there probably is a school there that would want to join,” according to a source. If the American loses two teams, it’s still ready to move on with 10 teams. The AAC could still play two divisions with a championship game. “I think we’ve established ourselves as a sixth (power) conference,” Aresco said.

Yes of course there are scenarios where it wouldn't work. Didn't know I had to cover every base as I was speaking to the above scenario.

You cited Wilkie's post, so I can't read your mind.

(03-07-2016 06:45 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  First time I've seen Dodd say anything remotely like this. Up to this article he has said over and over again the B12 is not nor will they ever expand.

Interesting to say the least. He isn't a hack.

That's what I thought, too. Somebody must have put a bug in his ear since last week.

Just ready for the Big12 to grab Cincy and Memphis and be done with it.

(03-07-2016 07:45 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  UMass couldn't nut up to join the MAC....

The MAC basketball conference isn't the American. UMass basketball would compete well with the American. It is too bad UMass hasn't developed a football following.

No to UMASS

(03-07-2016 08:51 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  No to UMASS

SMU @ Umass in Foxboro would be a hot game.

(03-07-2016 08:33 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 07:17 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:00 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  UMass? San Diego State?

Best hope is Army. UMass would most certainly be chomping at the bit to be #12.

UMASS would make sense as an addition but only if UConn is still a conference mate. They are a project but UConn gives them an antagonist to push the development they need.

Im not in any way saying UMass would be a good move---I'm just saying they would jump instantly at the opportunity to join.

In truth---its tougher if we just lose one. If you lose 2, standing pat at 10 works just fine.

If we lose one, the best option is Army. After that, the next best option is to go to 14 with Army+Air Force+Colorado St. I think there is a small chance that might actually fly.

If none of those options are available, the remaining choices are all pretty bad and offer no immediate up side beyond providing a warm body for #12. Despite the difficulties of an 11 team conference with unbalanced divisions---I might think standing pat at 11 could still be the best bet. Otherwise your adding S Miss, or UMass, or Marshall, or Old Dominion, or some other random that just soaks up a full share and doesn't really add any real value for the renegotiation that is right around the corner.

UMAss football only? Just because it lets you stand pat long term, while filling the #12 spot for football. Not that UMAss is any prize, but they'd take an arrangement where you could do to them what the Sun Belt did to Idaho and NMSU. I'm not sure that you can do a CCG with 11, scheduling a round-robin. I know you can't with 13--the SEC found that out when they had A&M and before they got Mizzou.

So...
AAC EAst: UMass, UConn, Temple, ECU, USF, UCF
AAC West: NAvy, Cincy, Memphis, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, SMU (6 of 7)

Nah. With the G5 performance pool being worth more, there is greater disincentive to add to bottom of a conference. UMass football is horrible. We don't need their 4 automatic OOC losses a year. Worse yet, the most attractive part of their athletics would be basketball (which is usually decent)---which you are not adding.

Nope, I'd stand pat and maybe add Wichita as a non-football member. I think that makes more sense and leaves the conference with more flexibility in future moves.

Ok I'm sold

(03-07-2016 07:57 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 07:45 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  UMass couldn't nut up to join the MAC....

True. But what school out there other than a UMass would make it so obvious that they would join under those circumstances? Byu and Army could join whenever they wanted, so they wouldn't care about an expansion.

Byu might if the dollars were enough and they were passed over again

(03-07-2016 08:54 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:51 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  No to UMASS

SMU @ Umass in Foxboro would be a hot game.

Someone in the drive-through just called you a twink what does that mean?

(03-07-2016 09:00 PM)Knightbengal Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 07:57 PM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 07:45 PM)PirateTreasureNC Wrote:  UMass couldn't nut up to join the MAC....

True. But what school out there other than a UMass would make it so obvious that they would join under those circumstances? Byu and Army could join whenever they wanted, so they wouldn't care about an expansion.

Byu might if the dollars were enough and they were passed over again

would the AAC let them keep the BYU network and everything that goes with it?

(03-07-2016 04:43 PM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Can a G5 conference with 10 teams have a football championship game just like the B12 can?

Can Petino keep his Johnson in his pants?

(03-07-2016 09:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:54 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:51 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  No to UMASS

SMU @ Umass in Foxboro would be a hot game.

Someone in the drive-through just called you a twink what does that mean?

I'm on the fry station...leave me alone. I have to concentrate.

(03-07-2016 08:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:33 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:15 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 07:17 PM)BigEastHomer Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 05:12 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Best hope is Army. UMass would most certainly be chomping at the bit to be #12.

UMASS would make sense as an addition but only if UConn is still a conference mate. They are a project but UConn gives them an antagonist to push the development they need.

Im not in any way saying UMass would be a good move---I'm just saying they would jump instantly at the opportunity to join.

In truth---its tougher if we just lose one. If you lose 2, standing pat at 10 works just fine.

If we lose one, the best option is Army. After that, the next best option is to go to 14 with Army+Air Force+Colorado St. I think there is a small chance that might actually fly.

If none of those options are available, the remaining choices are all pretty bad and offer no immediate up side beyond providing a warm body for #12. Despite the difficulties of an 11 team conference with unbalanced divisions---I might think standing pat at 11 could still be the best bet. Otherwise your adding S Miss, or UMass, or Marshall, or Old Dominion, or some other random that just soaks up a full share and doesn't really add any real value for the renegotiation that is right around the corner.

UMAss football only? Just because it lets you stand pat long term, while filling the #12 spot for football. Not that UMAss is any prize, but they'd take an arrangement where you could do to them what the Sun Belt did to Idaho and NMSU. I'm not sure that you can do a CCG with 11, scheduling a round-robin. I know you can't with 13--the SEC found that out when they had A&M and before they got Mizzou.

So...
AAC EAst: UMass, UConn, Temple, ECU, USF, UCF
AAC West: NAvy, Cincy, Memphis, Tulane, Tulsa, Houston, SMU (6 of 7)

Nah. With the G5 performance pool being worth more, there is greater disincentive to add to bottom of a conference. UMass football is horrible. We don't need their 4 automatic OOC losses a year. Worse yet, the most attractive part of their athletics would be basketball (which is usually decent)---which you are not adding.

Nope, I'd stand pat and maybe add Wichita as a non-football member. I think that makes more sense and leaves the conference with more flexibility in future moves.

I was thinking if you guys lost 1. If you lose nobody, you either stand pat or maybe grab Wichita. IF you lose 2, same thing.

But if you lose 1, you can't stand pat at 11, unless you drop your CCG. The advantage of UMAss FB only is that you can get rid of them if you want to. IF you take UMass as a full member, you're not getting rid of them.

Like Charlie Sheen used to say about hookers "I'm not paying for the sex. I'm paying them to leave." That's what UMass FB only does for the AAC.

Looking at it that way, UMass FB-only might be more attractive than bringing in Northern Illinois or Southern Miss or Rice or Marshall as a full member.

(03-07-2016 09:27 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 09:06 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:54 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 08:51 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  No to UMASS

SMU @ Umass in Foxboro would be a hot game.

Someone in the drive-through just called you a twink what does that mean?

I'm on the fry station...leave me alone. I have to concentrate.

someone just stole your Miata

TV viewership is changing folks. College football is grasping to straws with the TV contracts and # of viewers logic. It is changing and quick. The younger generation is cutting the cable. They are done with traditional TV. They are using Amazon Fire, Hulu, etc. They aren't interested in paying for a bunch of channels or necessarily watching it live. I just bought Amazon Fire today and I can see the change. No more being dictated when to watch TV shows...more "on demand". I only pay for what I want.

The thought of just including channels as part of a package (guaranteed #s) is going away. And so are the habits of the older tradition of sitting around the TV to wait and watch a show. With that it will be more about Brand, team success and true active fans Vs everyone has our channel like it or not...so we can include NYC, Boston, etc in our numbers.

I would more afraid of a successful UCF leaving than UConn. A huge young growing alumni base...