Did anybody ever post the operating athletic budgets of the candidates compared the current AAC teams?

(07-09-2019 09:53 AM)Billy Bob Bearcat Wrote:  Marshall seems to be the backup plan if expansion out west doesn't work out. As a singular add, they bring a great regional game for UC, Temple, and ECU while having a brand that is above CUSA. ODU, JMU, And all the other small time schools being pitched would dramatically hurt the AAC brand. While Marshall has the history/brand and current performance to avoid that.

I would rank the order the AAC is approaching expansion as:

1. BYU
2. Army/VCU
3. A multiple school west expansion of 3 (Boise, SDSU, and CSU)
4. Marshall

I personally would like Marshall in the AAC. I haven’t mentioned them because I figured everyone would go nuts. I’m glad to see people coming around on Marshall. That’s a nice AAC East with:
Temple
Cincinnati
Marshall
ECU
UCF
USF

(07-13-2019 10:13 AM)esayem Wrote:  Did anybody ever post the operating athletic budgets of the candidates compared the current AAC teams?

Put them on Google for you

(07-13-2019 11:25 AM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 10:13 AM)esayem Wrote:  Did anybody ever post the operating athletic budgets of the candidates compared the current AAC teams?

Put them on Google for you

What’s a google? Should I use Alta Vista to find out? Or ask Jeeves?

Mr. esayem yells to butler, Jeeves.

“Jeeves, what’s a google!?!?”

Jeeves drops mop, and walks out of mansion.

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/

rank school conference revenue expenses allocated (subsidy)
49 Connecticut AAC $83,374,223 $83,121,820 $42,227,612 50.65
54 Cincinnati AAC $60,458,195 $62,804,292 $26,745,506 44.24
56 Houston AAC $57,174,900 $55,277,308 $25,703,451 44.96
57 Central Florida AAC $56,327,225 $56,327,225 $27,661,927 49.11
59 South Florida AAC $49,960,338 $48,227,500 $21,503,730 43.04
60 Memphis AAC $48,716,830 $48,443,158 $18,257,221 37.48
61 East Carolina AAC $48,312,311 $48,387,287 $19,739,500 40.86

(06-27-2019 01:56 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Army finished in the top 25 as the last one outside of the AAC, MWC, Northern Illinois and Western Michigan. Problem with Marshall is that their football have been a yo-yo from being above .500 to below .500 winning %.

What in the hell are you talking about? We have 5 winning seasons in the last six, two championship game appearances with one title, five bowl appearances with five bowl wins.

You need to think before you post really inane things. Or at least do some research so you can have a clue.

Surprised to see Marshall went anywhere from 3-9 to 6-6 in a 9-year stretch from ‘04 to ‘12 (the MAC Marshall days is the one I’ll always remember).

Which makes their fan base that much more impressive for a G5 who had a lost decade.

(07-13-2019 04:31 PM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  Surprised to see Marshall went anywhere from 3-9 to 6-6 in a 9-year stretch from ‘04 to ‘12 (the MAC Marshall days is the one I’ll always remember).

Which makes their fan base that much more impressive for a G5 who had a lost decade.

Well, a lot of things happened to cause that:

First, Pruett left after the 04 season just ahead of NCAA sanctions that reduced our scholarships. At the time, CUSA was the equivalent of the AAC today. We just didn't have the horses to compete. Once the effect of the sanctions began to ease, you could see the trend moving back up. The year Snyder resigned, 2009, we went to a bowl and beat Ohio. Rick Minter coached the team.

Once Doc was hired, it took some time to get into a flow, hence the 2010 and 2012 seasons. So from 2013 to 2018, five winning seasons, 5 bowl wins, two ccg appearances, one title, one top 25 finish, and two p5 wins.

People want to point to the 2016 season as some kind of benchmark. It wasn't. It was a perfect poop storm of prima donnas and thugs on the team. Litton lost the team. No one wanted to do anything for him. The players attitudes overall sucked. Doc had to clean house, and that knocked us back a bit. 2016 was the exception, not the rule.

I don't ever see UCF being in a conference with Marshall again.

(07-13-2019 07:14 PM)Sideshow2313 Wrote:  I don't ever see UCF being in a conference with Marshall again.

Sad considering Marshall went to bat for UCF to get you in the MAC and then went to bat for you to join CUSA as well.

Was hoping UCF would return the favor.

(07-13-2019 10:13 AM)esayem Wrote:  Did anybody ever post the operating athletic budgets of the candidates compared the current AAC teams?

More importantly should look at percentage subsidized. Marshall is currently 48% subsidized which is in line with AAC teams.

For comparison, most of the other teams being mentioned are over 60% subsidized.

(07-13-2019 08:20 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 07:14 PM)Sideshow2313 Wrote:  I don't ever see UCF being in a conference with Marshall again.

Sad considering Marshall went to bat for UCF to get you in the MAC and then went to bat for you to join CUSA as well.

Was hoping UCF would return the favor.

You just echoed my sentiments!

Here is why Marshall is not in the conversation:

From Equity in Athletics (US Department of Education)

full time undergraduates: 7,773 (this is even fewer than UAB, Vermont, and Idaho)

Athletic budget: $30,753,677

Donations: $3,652,264
Gate: $3,887,680

Student Fees: $6,267,660
Tax Payer Money (from School): $8,078,014

This program is pretty topped out as far as support (a massive $900 a year fee for every full time student!) and subsidies (the school is transferring an addition $1000 per student to athletics from it's State of West Virginia education allocation) and still $15M/year below the bottom of the American. Where is that additional money to come from? We are talking raising $250M in the next decade to support an AAC level program.

Rather than give the AI rating (which is not good) I'll just give you indicators of AI and you can figure out where Marshall stands

4-year graduation rate  29%
Fall 2017 acceptance rate 90%
SAT 980 / ACT 19 (Marshall provided this information)

It's safe to say this would be the absolute bottom school in the American in academic terms, and by a good margin. That is saying something when the competition includes ECU, Memphis and Wichita State. Further their Endowment is only $110M, which is less than half the other small endowments of ECU, Wichita State, Memphis and UCF (UCF wtf?).

The only reason Marshall has any brand name at all is for those of us over 55 years of age who remember the tragic plane crash. There really is not a single category Marshall looks good in.

(07-13-2019 11:27 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Here is why Marshall is not in the conversation:

From Equity in Athletics (US Department of Education)

full time undergraduates: 7,773 (this is even fewer than UAB, Vermont, and Idaho)

Athletic budget: $30,753,677

Donations: $3,652,264
Gate: $3,887,680

Student Fees: $6,267,660
Tax Payer Money (from School): $8,078,014

This program is pretty topped out as far as support (a massive $900 a year fee for every full time student!) and subsidies (the school is transferring an addition $1000 per student to athletics from it's State of West Virginia education allocation) and still $15M/year below the bottom of the American. Where is that additional money to come from? We are talking raising $250M in the next decade to support an AAC level program.

Rather than give the AI rating (which is not good) I'll just give you indicators of AI and you can figure out where Marshall stands

4-year graduation rate  29%
Fall 2017 acceptance rate 90%
SAT 980 / ACT 19 (Marshall provided this information)

It's safe to say this would be the absolute bottom school in the American in academic terms, and by a good margin. That is saying something when the competition includes ECU, Memphis and Wichita State. Further their Endowment is only $110M, which is less than half the other small endowments of ECU, Wichita State, Memphis and UCF (UCF wtf?).

The only reason Marshall has any brand name at all is for those of us over 55 years of age who remember the tragic plane crash. There really is not a single category Marshall looks good in.

You probably shouldn’t criticize anyone regarding football, basketball, or branding. We have branding for many other reasons.

All SJSU has been is a suckling on the teet of the MWC. That plane crash comment has to be one of the most uninformed and insensitive comments I've heard on a board in a long time.

And I see that you are a fan of schools across the country. So, after the fourth week of the season when SJSU is 0-4, do you go to the closet and break out your Brutus gear?

If you have read most posts on the AAC board, most Marshall fans have said that we don't expect the invite, but they’re not getting BYU, Army, AFA, or Boise.

I’ve said my peace, and I know others will be along behind me with better factual info regarding our academics (we were ranked by either Princeton or Forbes as the #14 public university in the south). Bottom line is, you have no damned clue any more than anyone else in regard to what the AAC is doing, so whatever you say.

(06-27-2019 03:02 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 01:56 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Army finished in the top 25 as the last one outside of the AAC, MWC, Northern Illinois and Western Michigan. Problem with Marshall is that their football have been a yo-yo from being above .500 to below .500 winning %.

I mentioned at beginning that my info does not include Army. Obviously if the AAC can get BYU or Army then they will. My info was Marshall vs everyone else.

Our football team has only had one bad season over the last 6 years. We were crippled with injuries at key positions. Once again, we have a winning percentage of 67% over the last 6 years. We won 10+ games three times, 9 games once, and 8 games once. Winning seasons and bowl wins 5/6 years. Beat Maryland, NIU (MAC Champion), UCONN, Colorado St, and USF in bowl games.

For comparison, ODU only has 1 winning season since moving up to FBS.

Flash news winning doesn't get you into conferences and if it did you guys would not have been here in CUSA with us newbies. There wasn't a single obvious candidate that AAC sees as viable at this point that is looking to get into the AAC and they might stand pat at 11 until one emerges and while these things usually move behind the scenes its hard to see a member that stands out right now. As per you poopooing on ODU regardng the performance realize that nobody cares about Marshal outside of CUSA if they did, again you will not be hanging out with newbies. For now it appears you will be staying with us lowly denizens even with your glorious performances and glittering reputation and brand value.

(07-13-2019 11:27 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The only reason Marshall has any brand name at all is for those of us over 55 years of age who remember the tragic plane crash. There really is not a single category Marshall looks good in.

You know, if you're intent on exposing yourself as a low-class POS, you should at least say something that's remotely true.

(07-14-2019 12:57 AM)TuckerGnat Wrote:  

(07-13-2019 11:27 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The only reason Marshall has any brand name at all is for those of us over 55 years of age who remember the tragic plane crash. There really is not a single category Marshall looks good in.

You know, if you're intent on exposing yourself as a low-class POS, you should at least say something that's remotely true.

A BIG +3

(07-14-2019 12:41 AM)12thmonarch Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 03:02 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 01:56 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  Army finished in the top 25 as the last one outside of the AAC, MWC, Northern Illinois and Western Michigan. Problem with Marshall is that their football have been a yo-yo from being above .500 to below .500 winning %.

I mentioned at beginning that my info does not include Army. Obviously if the AAC can get BYU or Army then they will. My info was Marshall vs everyone else.

Our football team has only had one bad season over the last 6 years. We were crippled with injuries at key positions. Once again, we have a winning percentage of 67% over the last 6 years. We won 10+ games three times, 9 games once, and 8 games once. Winning seasons and bowl wins 5/6 years. Beat Maryland, NIU (MAC Champion), UCONN, Colorado St, and USF in bowl games.

For comparison, ODU only has 1 winning season since moving up to FBS.

Flash news winning doesn't get you into conferences and if it did you guys would not have been here in CUSA with us newbies. There wasn't a single obvious candidate that AAC sees as viable at this point that is looking to get into the AAC and they might stand pat at 11 until one emerges and while these things usually move behind the scenes its hard to see a member that stands out right now. As per you poopooing on ODU regardng the performance realize that nobody cares about Marshal outside of CUSA if they did, again you will not be hanging out with newbies. For now it appears you will be staying with us lowly denizens even with your glorious performances and glittering reputation and brand value.

Neither does a 25k stadium and a massively subsidized budget.

Nothing to see here.

(06-28-2019 06:51 AM)freshtop Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 12:42 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  Marshall University is the best choice if the AAC is unable to get BYU, Army, or any of the MWC teams.


Marshall has football history and brand recognition. Longest bowl winning streak in country and the overall best bowl winning percentage in the country. Only potential candidate who has finished ranked in the Top 25 over the last 6 years.

I still think that Army + VCU is the best option for AAC, or staying at 11.

However, WKU finished the 2015 Football season ranked 24th. Unless you aren't putting us in as a potential candidate (and if WKU is a stretch as a candidate then Marshall isn't too far ahead if you get my drift).

Army does not want to join.

(06-28-2019 06:57 AM)Stay Cool Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 03:08 PM)MUsince96 Wrote:  

(06-27-2019 03:05 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  As an App State fan/alum, I'd first prefer my school but would much rather see a Marshall or a Southern Miss get called up than one of these big market schools that can't get anyone to come to their games, and also stink at football more often than not

Yep. It's much better to have a large, engaged fan base in mid-size market than an empty stadium in a big market.

The addition of Rutgers to B1G says otherwise

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

You use Rutgers, but there are flops too like UTSA, FIU, and Charlotte. Even Georgia State has been pushed around by small market Troy quite a bit.