(07-26-2018 09:39 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:50 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:34 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  meh boise is gonna have a really good season every 4 years or so but other than that definitely not worth adding them to the conference. They suck in everything else (bball is getting better) and are million miles away from us in a tiny state with no market. Their academics make Memphis look like harvard. They bring nothing to the table, we're not getting a better TV contract with them... all they would do is take money away from the rest of us. Killing off the MWC is irrelevant, we are already perceived as the much better conference across the board.

I wouldn't add them unless we are kicking out a member first.

We really aren’t though. We’re grouped in with the rest of the G5... in part b/c there’s not a huge step down from us to the MWC in perception, and the from there not a huge step down from the MWC to the CUSA or whatever in perception.

Adding Boise drops the MWC down to CUSA/MAC level... and creates a massive gulf between us an the G4. It would put us in a true middle class between the P5 and the G4, with us being closer to the P5 than G4... which would also help us push the P6 narrative.

We really are though.

TV Contract (media perception) were way ahead of MWC and its going to be even bigger come 2019. Rankings (media/fan perception) were way ahead. Budgets? way ahead. Attendance? way ahead.

Thats football. Now look at basketball and it gets ridiculously wider. We're consensus right in the middle already. No one thinks MWC is a better conference than AAC. If you can find an expert that does please link. Adding boise isn't going to suddenly convince anyone we are P5 caliber and isn't going to mix up the conference perception rankings any.

We'll be thought of as the 6th best conference just like we are today, only have less money and a more difficult road to NY6 to show for it. Plus a school in the middle of nowhere that has no market and is nowhere close to any of our other schools.

Bottom line, Boise brings nothing to the table, "killing off the mwc" is irrelevant (ie doesnt give us anymore money or status), and is a silly idea.

The only way boise is a smart add is if:
1. it guarantees us a contract NY6 bowl
2. We kick out a member
3. It guarantees us a significant jump in TV revenue dollars

I don't think any of those 3 will happen with Boise so adding them is useless.

I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

(07-26-2018 09:30 AM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:17 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:02 AM)Def Berkkat Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:50 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:34 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  meh boise is gonna have a really good season every 4 years or so but other than that definitely not worth adding them to the conference. They suck in everything else (bball is getting better) and are million miles away from us in a tiny state with no market. Their academics make Memphis look like harvard. They bring nothing to the table, we're not getting a better TV contract with them... all they would do is take money away from the rest of us. Killing off the MWC is irrelevant, we are already perceived as the much better conference across the board.

I wouldn't add them unless we are kicking out a member first.

We really aren’t though. We’re grouped in with the rest of the G5... in part b/c there’s not a huge step down from us to the MWC in perception, and the from there not a huge step down from the MWC to the CUSA or whatever in perception.

Adding Boise drops the MWC down to CUSA/MAC level... and creates a massive gulf between us an the G4. It would put us in a true middle class between the P5 and the G4, with us being closer to the P5 than G4... which would also help us push the P6 narrative.

We kinda are...

I know for a fact that UC and UConn are approved for scheduling by the B1G as meeting their P5 requirement for OOC games.

I think Navy is approved on other levels too.

Is Boise?

What about our leading programs? Is UCF? Is Houston? Is Memphis? Is USF?

If we are perceived as superior... it’s marginal... and that’s the point. We could create a true perception change with an AAC/Boise being viewed as a power merger.

To my knowledge, they're not.

And the phrase "leading programs" is a rather arbitrary statement. The line between 12-0 and 4-8 is a lot thinner than you think.

Agreed. More talking about public perception in terms of the strength of the programs. UC has fallen off in that regard IMO with their struggles and the hypothetical fire is out, however I fully believe a strong season or 2 would quickly blow on those embers to re-ignite that perception again pretty quickly IMO. You guys have a great historical brand, certainly one with more history than UCF.

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:39 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:50 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:34 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  meh boise is gonna have a really good season every 4 years or so but other than that definitely not worth adding them to the conference. They suck in everything else (bball is getting better) and are million miles away from us in a tiny state with no market. Their academics make Memphis look like harvard. They bring nothing to the table, we're not getting a better TV contract with them... all they would do is take money away from the rest of us. Killing off the MWC is irrelevant, we are already perceived as the much better conference across the board.

I wouldn't add them unless we are kicking out a member first.

We really aren’t though. We’re grouped in with the rest of the G5... in part b/c there’s not a huge step down from us to the MWC in perception, and the from there not a huge step down from the MWC to the CUSA or whatever in perception.

Adding Boise drops the MWC down to CUSA/MAC level... and creates a massive gulf between us an the G4. It would put us in a true middle class between the P5 and the G4, with us being closer to the P5 than G4... which would also help us push the P6 narrative.

We really are though.

TV Contract (media perception) were way ahead of MWC and its going to be even bigger come 2019. Rankings (media/fan perception) were way ahead. Budgets? way ahead. Attendance? way ahead.

Thats football. Now look at basketball and it gets ridiculously wider. We're consensus right in the middle already. No one thinks MWC is a better conference than AAC. If you can find an expert that does please link. Adding boise isn't going to suddenly convince anyone we are P5 caliber and isn't going to mix up the conference perception rankings any.

We'll be thought of as the 6th best conference just like we are today, only have less money and a more difficult road to NY6 to show for it. Plus a school in the middle of nowhere that has no market and is nowhere close to any of our other schools.

Bottom line, Boise brings nothing to the table, "killing off the mwc" is irrelevant (ie doesnt give us anymore money or status), and is a silly idea.

The only way boise is a smart add is if:
1. it guarantees us a contract NY6 bowl
2. We kick out a member
3. It guarantees us a significant jump in TV revenue dollars

I don't think any of those 3 will happen with Boise so adding them is useless.

I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

CYP committee perception matters most. So far, they have shown no inclination to give BSU preferential treatment as some thought would be the case back in 2013. Since its' inception, the champ game participants have ended the season ranked...something only power conferences can claim. 2016 is a perfect example as neither the AAC nor the MWC had a team claim the top spot. Yet, both Navy and Temple ended the season ranked with 3 losses each and only one P5 win between them over a 10-2 BSU team with 2 P5 wins.

The AAC gets way more press than the MWC...both good and bad. In CFB articles, the AAC is included more often than the MWC even if it's just to show disparity (most recently conference revenue and commish salaries while the MWC is no where to be found). Looking at where the OP article in question originated from is very telling in and of itself.

Not that BSU would be a bad add just that they aren't needed for any perceived separation to take place. That's happening all on it's own and at a faster pace than anyone predicted when the league first formed.

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:39 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:50 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:34 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  meh boise is gonna have a really good season every 4 years or so but other than that definitely not worth adding them to the conference. They suck in everything else (bball is getting better) and are million miles away from us in a tiny state with no market. Their academics make Memphis look like harvard. They bring nothing to the table, we're not getting a better TV contract with them... all they would do is take money away from the rest of us. Killing off the MWC is irrelevant, we are already perceived as the much better conference across the board.

I wouldn't add them unless we are kicking out a member first.

We really aren’t though. We’re grouped in with the rest of the G5... in part b/c there’s not a huge step down from us to the MWC in perception, and the from there not a huge step down from the MWC to the CUSA or whatever in perception.

Adding Boise drops the MWC down to CUSA/MAC level... and creates a massive gulf between us an the G4. It would put us in a true middle class between the P5 and the G4, with us being closer to the P5 than G4... which would also help us push the P6 narrative.

We really are though.

TV Contract (media perception) were way ahead of MWC and its going to be even bigger come 2019. Rankings (media/fan perception) were way ahead. Budgets? way ahead. Attendance? way ahead.

Thats football. Now look at basketball and it gets ridiculously wider. We're consensus right in the middle already. No one thinks MWC is a better conference than AAC. If you can find an expert that does please link. Adding boise isn't going to suddenly convince anyone we are P5 caliber and isn't going to mix up the conference perception rankings any.

We'll be thought of as the 6th best conference just like we are today, only have less money and a more difficult road to NY6 to show for it. Plus a school in the middle of nowhere that has no market and is nowhere close to any of our other schools.

Bottom line, Boise brings nothing to the table, "killing off the mwc" is irrelevant (ie doesnt give us anymore money or status), and is a silly idea.

The only way boise is a smart add is if:
1. it guarantees us a contract NY6 bowl
2. We kick out a member
3. It guarantees us a significant jump in TV revenue dollars

I don't think any of those 3 will happen with Boise so adding them is useless.

I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

(07-26-2018 11:05 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

If the AAC could pull this off that would make it a legit P6. A new conference name would be needed to avoid legal issues from Temple, Tulsa etc. The extra bonus would be that AAC would get BYU and all of their drama and attitude.

2 of the 3 of Tulsa, UTEP, and NMSU could backfill the MW. It would be weaker but still better than other G4.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:39 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:50 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  We really aren’t though. We’re grouped in with the rest of the G5... in part b/c there’s not a huge step down from us to the MWC in perception, and the from there not a huge step down from the MWC to the CUSA or whatever in perception.

Adding Boise drops the MWC down to CUSA/MAC level... and creates a massive gulf between us an the G4. It would put us in a true middle class between the P5 and the G4, with us being closer to the P5 than G4... which would also help us push the P6 narrative.

We really are though.

TV Contract (media perception) were way ahead of MWC and its going to be even bigger come 2019. Rankings (media/fan perception) were way ahead. Budgets? way ahead. Attendance? way ahead.

Thats football. Now look at basketball and it gets ridiculously wider. We're consensus right in the middle already. No one thinks MWC is a better conference than AAC. If you can find an expert that does please link. Adding boise isn't going to suddenly convince anyone we are P5 caliber and isn't going to mix up the conference perception rankings any.

We'll be thought of as the 6th best conference just like we are today, only have less money and a more difficult road to NY6 to show for it. Plus a school in the middle of nowhere that has no market and is nowhere close to any of our other schools.

Bottom line, Boise brings nothing to the table, "killing off the mwc" is irrelevant (ie doesnt give us anymore money or status), and is a silly idea.

The only way boise is a smart add is if:
1. it guarantees us a contract NY6 bowl
2. We kick out a member
3. It guarantees us a significant jump in TV revenue dollars

I don't think any of those 3 will happen with Boise so adding them is useless.

I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:39 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  We really are though.

TV Contract (media perception) were way ahead of MWC and its going to be even bigger come 2019. Rankings (media/fan perception) were way ahead. Budgets? way ahead. Attendance? way ahead.

Thats football. Now look at basketball and it gets ridiculously wider. We're consensus right in the middle already. No one thinks MWC is a better conference than AAC. If you can find an expert that does please link. Adding boise isn't going to suddenly convince anyone we are P5 caliber and isn't going to mix up the conference perception rankings any.

We'll be thought of as the 6th best conference just like we are today, only have less money and a more difficult road to NY6 to show for it. Plus a school in the middle of nowhere that has no market and is nowhere close to any of our other schools.

Bottom line, Boise brings nothing to the table, "killing off the mwc" is irrelevant (ie doesnt give us anymore money or status), and is a silly idea.

The only way boise is a smart add is if:
1. it guarantees us a contract NY6 bowl
2. We kick out a member
3. It guarantees us a significant jump in TV revenue dollars

I don't think any of those 3 will happen with Boise so adding them is useless.

I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Every few years yes but after a short while they'd fall into the middle of the pack without the financial advantage they enjoy over the rest of the MWC now and a step up in competition at the top.

Their recruiting might improve though, especially from texas kids so maybe not. I think overall they would be 2nd tier in AAC, generally.

(07-26-2018 06:31 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  Written by the MWC site...

https://www.mwcconnection.com/2018/7/25/...conference





(Spoiler: AAC in a landslide)

Article sums it up well. AAC is clearly the 6th best conference in the country.

(07-26-2018 12:50 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Every few years yes but after a short while they'd fall into the middle of the pack without the financial advantage they enjoy over the rest of the MWC now and a step up in competition at the top.

Their recruiting might improve though, especially from texas kids so maybe not. I think overall they would be 2nd tier in AAC, generally.

If you think they would be 2nd tier you are on something. They have a better brand name than anyone in the AAC. They recruit everywhere and being in the AAC would only enhance them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:39 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  We really are though.

TV Contract (media perception) were way ahead of MWC and its going to be even bigger come 2019. Rankings (media/fan perception) were way ahead. Budgets? way ahead. Attendance? way ahead.

Thats football. Now look at basketball and it gets ridiculously wider. We're consensus right in the middle already. No one thinks MWC is a better conference than AAC. If you can find an expert that does please link. Adding boise isn't going to suddenly convince anyone we are P5 caliber and isn't going to mix up the conference perception rankings any.

We'll be thought of as the 6th best conference just like we are today, only have less money and a more difficult road to NY6 to show for it. Plus a school in the middle of nowhere that has no market and is nowhere close to any of our other schools.

Bottom line, Boise brings nothing to the table, "killing off the mwc" is irrelevant (ie doesnt give us anymore money or status), and is a silly idea.

The only way boise is a smart add is if:
1. it guarantees us a contract NY6 bowl
2. We kick out a member
3. It guarantees us a significant jump in TV revenue dollars

I don't think any of those 3 will happen with Boise so adding them is useless.

I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

We said the EXACT same thing when we were playing the likes of FIU (New Mexico), FAU (Fresno), and UTEP (Air Force) every year.

To draw another parallel, we looked like the worst football in the history of football last year, and scored more points on BYU than Boise did.

Boise is a 5-win team in the AAC.

(07-26-2018 11:39 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:05 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

If the AAC could pull this off that would make it a legit P6. A new conference name would be needed to avoid legal issues from Temple, Tulsa etc. The extra bonus would be that AAC would get BYU and all of their drama and attitude.

2 of the 3 of Tulsa, UTEP, and NMSU could backfill the MW. It would be weaker but still better than other G4.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Whatever advantage we gain from kicking out the "least sexy" teams from the conference we lose in spreading our footprint to unnecessary levels.

Temple, Tulsa, Tulane all bring value, especially on the basketball side for the first two.

Keep the conference as it is. If we must expand, add Army and BYU FB Only. Those are smart, easy adds that people will watch, that doesn't put a travelling onus on the rest of the conference.

(07-26-2018 01:23 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 12:50 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Every few years yes but after a short while they'd fall into the middle of the pack without the financial advantage they enjoy over the rest of the MWC now and a step up in competition at the top.

Their recruiting might improve though, especially from texas kids so maybe not. I think overall they would be 2nd tier in AAC, generally.

If you think they would be 2nd tier you are on something. They have a better brand name than anyone in the AAC. They recruit everywhere and being in the AAC would only enhance them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Their brand is still left over from their great 2000s run but its diminishing every year. They are still good, but beating up on trash mwc teams. They'd have to play tougher teams in the AAC, and we have even revenue distribution so they wouldn't have that advantage anymore over their opponents. Boise was dominant in the MWC last year but took a major embarrassing L to UVA. They are a shell of their former selves. Most years would finish 4-6 in the AAC occasionally challenging for a top 4 spot.

"(USA Today lists Temple and Tulane 128 and 130 even with the the unknown salaries)."

Yeah, no, Matt Rhule's last contract at Temple paid him $1.5M a year and that was going to be torn up if he didn't leave for Baylor. I highly doubt Geoff Collins is making under $1M a year.

(07-26-2018 01:36 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:39 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:05 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

If the AAC could pull this off that would make it a legit P6. A new conference name would be needed to avoid legal issues from Temple, Tulsa etc. The extra bonus would be that AAC would get BYU and all of their drama and attitude.

2 of the 3 of Tulsa, UTEP, and NMSU could backfill the MW. It would be weaker but still better than other G4.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Whatever advantage we gain from kicking out the "least sexy" teams from the conference we lose in spreading our footprint to unnecessary levels.

Temple, Tulsa, Tulane all bring value, especially on the basketball side for the first two.

Keep the conference as it is. If we must expand, add Army and BYU FB Only. Those are smart, easy adds that people will watch, that doesn't put a travelling onus on the rest of the conference.

We have the most CCG appearances for football, but by all means, throw us out

Is this seriously even a question?

(07-26-2018 02:19 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 01:36 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:39 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:05 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

If the AAC could pull this off that would make it a legit P6. A new conference name would be needed to avoid legal issues from Temple, Tulsa etc. The extra bonus would be that AAC would get BYU and all of their drama and attitude.

2 of the 3 of Tulsa, UTEP, and NMSU could backfill the MW. It would be weaker but still better than other G4.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Whatever advantage we gain from kicking out the "least sexy" teams from the conference we lose in spreading our footprint to unnecessary levels.

Temple, Tulsa, Tulane all bring value, especially on the basketball side for the first two.

Keep the conference as it is. If we must expand, add Army and BYU FB Only. Those are smart, easy adds that people will watch, that doesn't put a travelling onus on the rest of the conference.

We have the most CCG appearances for football, but by all means, throw us out

Replacing anyone in this conference with SDSU is just dumb. They've had a couple of good football seasons lately. What else have they done? Nothing comparable to Temple or Tulsa I'm sure. And I doubt they have the academics or recruiting grounds of Tulane.

(07-26-2018 11:05 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

Kicking out Temple are you? For Boise and SDSU? Nice.

At this point, I wouldn't drop anyone and I would only add BYU/Army/Air Force.