(08-28-2019 07:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:11 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-27-2019 10:01 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  

(08-27-2019 05:23 PM)esayem Wrote:  Not gonna work for Navy. No way they cancel Army, Air Force, or ND.

Will be interesting to see if they knock down the door and all conferences can scrap worthless divisions.

Who’s saying they need to? This is about league games not noncon.

The statement didn’t address the amount of conference games. You want a team to leave? Make a ten game round robin and Navy is setting sail.

For the umpteenth time, Aresco has already made it clear a 10 game round robin is not happening, and Navy isn't leaving or getting kicked out. And they will continue to play Army in December.

I’m making it clear 10 games is not an option.

Aresco beat you to it about a dozen times already.

So if AAC goes with divisionless 8 game conference schedule, each team would probably get 2 permanent rivals.

How about these 2 permanent rivals for each team

SMU - Houston, Navy
Houston - SMU, Navy
Navy - SMU, Houston

Tulsa - Memphis, Tulane
Memphis - Cincy, Tulsa
Cincy - Memphis, Temple
Temple - Cincy, ECU
ECU - Temple, UCF
Tulane - USF, Tulsa
UCF - USF, ECU
USF - UCF, Tulane

I know it's not the popular opinion on this thread, but I really like the idea of no divisions. Allows everyone to play each other more often, you know, that's kind of why you're in the same conference!

I feel it gives you the absolute best team possible to win the conference much more than having divisions.

(08-27-2019 09:32 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-27-2019 09:12 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  It doesn't hurt anyone if the AAC is allowed to reformat divisions. If I am a G5 conference, the last thing I want is a motivated AAC looking to poach.

If I am a P5 conference, I am not competing with them for an access bowl so who cares.

The NCAA doesn’t recognize P5 or G5, so there is no way the AAC is getting preferential treatment. They MAY be allowed 6 and 5 team divisions as a loophole, but no way they’re getting what every conference can benefit from: no divisions, no round robin, but a CCG. Not without everyone else.

The NCAA recognizes Autonomy and Non-Autonomy, which amounts to the same thing.

Not sure that will matter here, though.

(08-28-2019 07:39 AM)cubucks Wrote:  I know it's not the popular opinion on this thread, but I really like the idea of no divisions. Allows everyone to play each other more often, you know, that's kind of why you're in the same conference!

I feel it gives you the absolute best team possible to win the conference much more than having divisions.

Yes, ideally, there would be no divisions - and no CCGs. All conference teams would play full RR, and the team with the best record, with tiebreakers, is the winner.

But many conferences are simply too large for that now.

My opinion is that NCAA will grant a 3-4 year waiver. It's not AAC's fault that UConn left. This will give the AAC a few years to figure out what they want to do long term. If disapproved, then the AAC will move to add a new member by 2020, IMO. But again, it's not the AAC's fault that UConn left, and did not uphold the 27 month exit time, leaving the AAC with little time to find a solution.

(08-28-2019 07:59 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:39 AM)cubucks Wrote:  I know it's not the popular opinion on this thread, but I really like the idea of no divisions. Allows everyone to play each other more often, you know, that's kind of why you're in the same conference!

I feel it gives you the absolute best team possible to win the conference much more than having divisions.

Yes, ideally, there would be no divisions - and no CCGs. All conference teams would play full RR, and the team with the best record, with tiebreakers, is the winner.

But many conferences are simply too large for that now.

I still want CCG's with no divisions. Like I said, it's not the popular opinion, but to me personally, it makes sense.

(08-28-2019 08:28 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  My opinion is that NCAA will grant a 3-4 year waiver. It's not AAC's fault that UConn left. This will give the AAC a few years to figure out what they want to do long term.

That's my feeling too. The AAC will be given some leeway because it's not their fault a school left, and the other conferences will be disinclined to oppose some relief because they all know that could happen to them too, or at least most of them know that.

But I think those who believe the AAC will get permanent relief, in the form of a permanent waiver or rule change, are mistaken.

We shall see.

If I had to guess—

The ACC, AAC, and SBC would all be for CCG deregulation.

The Big 12 is going to be a hard no because they already have the set up they like. The PAC 12 probably isn’t going to see the benefit either.

The MAC, C-USA, and MWC all have convenient divisional set ups so they probably aren’t too inclined to deregulate. I’d call them indifferent at best.

Where things get interesting is with the Big Ten and SEC. the status quo is working well for the SEC now but the Big Ten is having trouble producing quality division winners in the West to face the juggernauts in the East and deregulation could be helpful to them. If both of these two come out in favor of deregulation it’s because they are looking to expand down the road.

Liked the traditional set up best but that ship has sailed. I agree best past that is divionless. In 12 team and under conferences think is fairer way to get CCG teams (play at least half other division anyway and often easy to see top of one division could be 3rd or 4th best in conference). In 14 team conferences maybe not (given amount of teams missed, 2 round robin divisions levels playing field more), but still prefer divisionless there anyway. Otherwise feels like you are only half in a conference with teams in other division.

(08-28-2019 08:42 AM)cubucks Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:59 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:39 AM)cubucks Wrote:  I know it's not the popular opinion on this thread, but I really like the idea of no divisions. Allows everyone to play each other more often, you know, that's kind of why you're in the same conference!

I feel it gives you the absolute best team possible to win the conference much more than having divisions.

Yes, ideally, there would be no divisions - and no CCGs. All conference teams would play full RR, and the team with the best record, with tiebreakers, is the winner.

But many conferences are simply too large for that now.

I still want CCG's with no divisions. Like I said, it's not the popular opinion, but to me personally, it makes sense.

I understand that. It likely will always produce a very good game, and as a fan I want to see good games. Would rather 12-0 Clemson vs 11-1 FSU than vs 7-5 Pitt. And sure, these games are firstly about money.

But IMO these games should mostly be about producing the most valid champ possible, and if you have no divisions and RR, then IMO the winner of the RR is the valid champ, so a CCG is extraneous. It gives a team that finished second a second chance to win that they didn't deserve.

Assuming going division-less in football is the plan moving forward, that would mean that the AAC will either add a basketball-only member to get back to twelve teams, or keep the eleven-team format until a worthy twelfth full-program is deemed appropriate. If it is the latter, and from the steadfast belief from AAC fans that they will not be going to 20-game round-robin, they can keep the 18-game format (but then allow extra games played against the bottom).

Wichita State wasn't discussed being added until March 2017. We probably won't know anything regarding the basketball side until later in the basketball season.

(08-28-2019 08:28 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  My opinion is that NCAA will grant a 3-4 year waiver. It's not AAC's fault that UConn left. This will give the AAC a few years to figure out what they want to do long term. If disapproved, then the AAC will move to add a new member by 2020, IMO. But again, it's not the AAC's fault that UConn left, and did not uphold the 27 month exit time, leaving the AAC with little time to find a solution.

So play uneven divisions. Allowing a waiver to the AAC to put their best two in a CCG gives them an unfair advantage to the other G5 conferences in vying for the Access Bowl bid. Losing UCONN has nothing to do with going divisionless and still have a CCG, it's not the odd number it's that you're too big to do a round robin without a 10 game schedule. Too big with UCONN, too big without UCONN. AAC doesn't want to add, fine. Play uneven divisions, MAC did it, CUSA did it. Or they could change the rules but giving a waiver to the AAC for this is unfair and has nothing to do with UCONN leaving.

(08-27-2019 09:37 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(08-27-2019 08:22 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-27-2019 06:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I bet they get a 3-year waiver.

They shouldn't get any waiver except for a couple of years for division play without round robin, like the MAC got.

If they want to pair the two best teams, play a round robin. If necessary, kick someone out.

But who would get the boot? Tulsa? East Carolina? Those are the two weakest schools I can think of. I think Tulane is safe given their location and academics.

Could they do it though? Has it happened before? Temple was football only in the Big East, C-USA 2.0 helped Charlotte and St Louis find a new home in the A-10, the MAC gave an ultimatum to football only UMass and the Sun Belt told football only Idaho and NMSU to find a new home but other than that I can’t think of any case where an all-sports school got kicked out.

Reportedly, Tulsa has some serious financial issues and the Athletic Department is running large deficits. If they drop football or drop down one level that would solve the problem.

(08-28-2019 07:18 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:15 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:13 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 07:11 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-27-2019 10:01 PM)1845 Bear Wrote:  Who’s saying they need to? This is about league games not noncon.

The statement didn’t address the amount of conference games. You want a team to leave? Make a ten game round robin and Navy is setting sail.

For the umpteenth time, Aresco has already made it clear a 10 game round robin is not happening, and Navy isn't leaving or getting kicked out. And they will continue to play Army in December.

I’m making it clear 10 games is not an option.

Aresco beat you to it about a dozen times already.

Nah, I beat him to it months ago when UConn bailed.

(08-28-2019 08:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 08:28 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  My opinion is that NCAA will grant a 3-4 year waiver. It's not AAC's fault that UConn left. This will give the AAC a few years to figure out what they want to do long term.

That's my feeling too. The AAC will be given some leeway because it's not their fault a school left, and the other conferences will be disinclined to oppose some relief because they all know that could happen to them too, or at least most of them know that.

But I think those who believe the AAC will get permanent relief, in the form of a permanent waiver or rule change, are mistaken.

We shall see.

Then why don't they replace the departing team like every other conference has had to do?

It's clear what they are trying to do.

(08-28-2019 08:51 AM)ohio1317 Wrote:  Liked the traditional set up best but that ship has sailed. I agree best past that is divionless. In 12 team and under conferences think is fairer way to get CCG teams (play at least half other division anyway and often easy to see top of one division could be 3rd or 4th best in conference). In 14 team conferences maybe not (given amount of teams missed, 2 round robin divisions levels playing field more), but still prefer divisionless there anyway. Otherwise feels like you are only half in a conference with teams in other division.

This is the PAC 12's problem. With 12 teams and the 9-game division schedule, the 2nd best team in the conference is often left out and the CCG is often a rematch. Double whammy.

The PAC 12 would benefit from an 8-game divisionless schedule. Potential for more overall wins and fewer overall losses. Still allow teams to play in California frequently and set up a better CCG scenario.

(08-28-2019 10:12 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 08:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 08:28 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  My opinion is that NCAA will grant a 3-4 year waiver. It's not AAC's fault that UConn left. This will give the AAC a few years to figure out what they want to do long term.

That's my feeling too. The AAC will be given some leeway because it's not their fault a school left, and the other conferences will be disinclined to oppose some relief because they all know that could happen to them too, or at least most of them know that.

But I think those who believe the AAC will get permanent relief, in the form of a permanent waiver or rule change, are mistaken.

We shall see.

Then why don't they replace the departing team like every other conference has had to do?

It's clear what they are trying to do.

NCAA doesn't want to spark another round of realignment musical chairs. If the AAC adds a 12th team (and potentially a 13th and 14th), the team is likely to come from the MWC and/or CUSA. May be even the MAC or Sun Belt. Then, the raided conference(s) looks to backfill....it might be better to just let the AAC stay at 11 and let the rest of the G5 enjoy some relative stability for a while.

(08-28-2019 10:12 AM)esayem Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 08:46 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 08:28 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  My opinion is that NCAA will grant a 3-4 year waiver. It's not AAC's fault that UConn left. This will give the AAC a few years to figure out what they want to do long term.

That's my feeling too. The AAC will be given some leeway because it's not their fault a school left, and the other conferences will be disinclined to oppose some relief because they all know that could happen to them too, or at least most of them know that.

But I think those who believe the AAC will get permanent relief, in the form of a permanent waiver or rule change, are mistaken.

We shall see.

Then why don't they replace the departing team like every other conference has had to do?

It's clear what they are trying to do.

When Georgia Southern & AppSt announced that they were joining the Sun Belt the plan was to add the Championship game since the conference would have 12 football members. Western Kentucky left which change the plans of the Sun Belt. Aresco wants to go division less because to have to uneven divisions would be a scheduling nightmare and also because he knows what the conference would lose in lost revenues from not having a conference championship game. I do not see the Sun Belt supporting any type waiver for the AAC.

Houston's permanent rivals would be SMU and Memphis, according to our beat writer.

UCF-USF obv.

The rest are up for grabs.

We'll know by October whether the proposal will fly.