Can we rename the Realignment Forum the UConn T-Shirt Fan Forum? For Pete’s sake, you guys think more highly of UConn than their own fan base does.

(07-03-2020 09:29 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 08:14 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I would say once UConn moves to the Big East the Big East should become a lot stronger than the AAC. If I were Temple and I could join the Big East even if it meant I'd have to be independent or be in a lesser conference in football, I'd do it.

uconn has been bad in basketball for 6 seasons in a row now, why would losing uconn change anything about any dynamics

also uconn football is completely abysmal and has shown zero signs they will ever be competitive..temple is good in football and regularly in the conversation for the aac title

so you recommend temple sacrifices football, what makes by far the most money in college athletics, to leave a multi-bid basketball league where temple has already made the tourney multiple times, just to go join a slightly better multi-bid conference

In seven years in the AAC Temple's made it twice and one was a First Four loss. In Dunphy's seven years in the A-10 they made it the last six years. The AAC has been very bad for Temple men's basketball. You can say the Big East is "slightly better" in basketball now but again you have to account for UConn moving to the BE so will the BE be slightly better a few years from now? Temple had to drop sports (baseball, softball) because of the AAC. Maybe they can afford to get them back if they didn't have to travel to Texas several games a year. Now is football important enough to make up for those things? Temple isn't UConn and it's a moot point because Villanova won't want Temple in the Big East anyway.

(07-03-2020 10:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  AAC is clearly below the P5 and Big East. Still don't know that I would call them a "tweener." I think of a tweener as like the ACC and WAC in football in the 80s. It was considered really odd when a Clemson or BYU won an MNC. It would not be considered odd if Cincinnati or Memphis or Houston won a title in basketball. A P5 or BE school wouldn't be embarrassed by losing to an AAC school.

Well, since neither Houston nor Memphis has ever won a hoops national title, and Cincy hasn't in almost 60 years, I think that would be considered very unusual, very surprising.

As for the ACC in the 1970s and 1980s, yes, a "tweener" is a good way to describe their football, and it was an underdog upset when Clemson won the 1981 national title, I remember that well. However, Clemson at that time was clearly above any AAC teams is right now in terms of football history and pedigree. The ACC added FSU precisely to move off the "tweener" bubble and position themselves as a power league.

I would say that Clemson winning the 1981 football title was not regarded then as being as much of an upset as any of the AAC schools you mentioned winning a hoops title would be now.

I typically agree with you, and often strongly, Quo. But I disagree with this somewhat.

You know how close Houston and Memphis came to winning it all (they both likely should have) and that Cincy has been to a Final Four since 1990. These are three programs for which going back to the Final Four in the future would be less surprising or unusual than seeing two thirds of the members of the P6 do so. And I'm not suggesting you would argue, for example, that Houston making a Final Four would be more unusual than, say, Cal or TCU or Northwestern or Boston College or ... doing so. Just being clear on this.

Clemson in 1981 was unusual because, back then, the ACC was — shall we say "modest" — in football. And for a program (even a strong one) from that league to win a national title ... unusual.

An AAC team winning a national title in men's hoops today would not necessarily be a full "upset" if that team were loaded and well coached. Yes, it would be a bit unexpected and beyond the norm. But not "very surprising" as you note. I would probably go with "somewhat surprising."

(07-03-2020 11:34 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:29 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 08:14 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I would say once UConn moves to the Big East the Big East should become a lot stronger than the AAC. If I were Temple and I could join the Big East even if it meant I'd have to be independent or be in a lesser conference in football, I'd do it.

uconn has been bad in basketball for 6 seasons in a row now, why would losing uconn change anything about any dynamics

also uconn football is completely abysmal and has shown zero signs they will ever be competitive..temple is good in football and regularly in the conversation for the aac title

so you recommend temple sacrifices football, what makes by far the most money in college athletics, to leave a multi-bid basketball league where temple has already made the tourney multiple times, just to go join a slightly better multi-bid conference

In seven years in the AAC Temple's made it twice and one was a First Four loss. In Dunphy's seven years in the A-10 they made it the last six years. The AAC has been very bad for Temple men's basketball. You can say the Big East is "slightly better" in basketball now but again you have to account for UConn moving to the BE so will the BE be slightly better a few years from now? Temple had to drop sports (baseball, softball) because of the AAC. Maybe they can afford to get them back if they didn't have to travel to Texas several games a year. Now is football important enough to make up for those things? Temple isn't UConn and it's a moot point because Villanova won't want Temple in the Big East anyway.

Temple hoops would, on paper, improve were the program in the Big East. But it is, as you note, a moot point.

(07-03-2020 11:19 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Can we rename the Realignment Forum the UConn T-Shirt Fan Forum? For Pete’s sake, you guys think more highly of UConn than their own fan base does.

If, C-Ave, you are partly "looking at me" with this post ... Yes, I think highly of UConn men's hoops, women's hoops, baseball and academics. I give credit when due. UConn football is bad. No other way to say it. Has been for years and I seriously doubt the program is going to get much better as an indy.

I defend the AAC and the BE with fairness and consistency. Similarly, I will be constructively critical of the two leagues when needed.

I have noted many times on this board that I am not a "fan" of any single conference (in the strict sense).

My main team is Vanderbilt and nobody on this board is willing to be more critical of the Dores athletics program (in a fair manner, of course) than I am.

My brother teaches at Vanderbilt and attended Cincinnati. We pull hard for the Dores and Bearcats.

And now I'm headed to the grocery store to shop for my elderly parents.

(07-03-2020 11:55 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 10:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  AAC is clearly below the P5 and Big East. Still don't know that I would call them a "tweener." I think of a tweener as like the ACC and WAC in football in the 80s. It was considered really odd when a Clemson or BYU won an MNC. It would not be considered odd if Cincinnati or Memphis or Houston won a title in basketball. A P5 or BE school wouldn't be embarrassed by losing to an AAC school.

Well, since neither Houston nor Memphis has ever won a hoops national title, and Cincy hasn't in almost 60 years, I think that would be considered very unusual, very surprising.

As for the ACC in the 1970s and 1980s, yes, a "tweener" is a good way to describe their football, and it was an underdog upset when Clemson won the 1981 national title, I remember that well. However, Clemson at that time was clearly above any AAC teams is right now in terms of football history and pedigree. The ACC added FSU precisely to move off the "tweener" bubble and position themselves as a power league.

I would say that Clemson winning the 1981 football title was not regarded then as being as much of an upset as any of the AAC schools you mentioned winning a hoops title would be now.

I typically agree with you, and often strongly, Quo. But I disagree with this somewhat.

You know how close Houston and Memphis came to winning it all (they both likely should have) and that Cincy has been to a Final Four since 1990. These are three programs for which going back to the Final Four in the future would be less surprising or unusual than seeing two thirds of the members of the P6 do so. And I'm not suggesting you would argue, for example, that Houston making a Final Four would be more unusual than, say, Cal or TCU or Northwestern or Boston College or ... doing so. Just being clear on this.

Clemson in 1981 was unusual because, back then, the ACC was — shall we say "modest" — in football. And for a program (even a strong one) from that league to win a national title ... unusual.

An AAC team winning a national title in men's hoops today would not necessarily be a full "upset" if that team were loaded and well coached. Yes, it would be a bit unexpected and beyond the norm. But not "very surprising" as you note. I would probably go with "somewhat surprising."

Eh ... Memphis almost won a title 12 years ago that would have been stripped anyway. They haven't officially been to the Final 4 since the Nixon administration. Cincy hasn't been to a Final 4 since the George HW Bush administration. Houston hasn't since the Reagan administration.

Clemson in the 1970s and leading up to 1981 was an often-ranked team and they had a pedigree going back decades. They were the ACC's football flagship.

So just using my memory, I believe that Clemson winning that title was not as much a shock as any of the three AAC teams you mention would be in hoops. Now BYU in 1984? That's another story.

(07-03-2020 12:02 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 11:19 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Can we rename the Realignment Forum the UConn T-Shirt Fan Forum? For Pete’s sake, you guys think more highly of UConn than their own fan base does.

If, C-Ave, you are partly "looking at me" with this post ... Yes, I think highly of UConn men's hoops, women's hoops, baseball and academics. I give credit when due. UConn football is bad. No other way to say it. Has been for years and I seriously doubt the program is going to get much better as an indy.

I defend the AAC and the BE with fairness and consistency. Similarly, I will be constructively critical of the two leagues when needed.

I have noted many times on this board that I am not a "fan" of any single conference (in the strict sense).

My main team is Vanderbilt and nobody on this board is willing to be more critical of the Dores athletics program (in a fair manner, of course) than I am.

My brother teaches at Vanderbilt and attended Cincinnati. We pull hard for the Dores and Bearcats.

And now I'm headed to the grocery store to shop for my elderly parents.

It’s a global observation, not a shot directly at you Bill. I have seen far too many posts over the past few years from random fan of other schools when it is obvious they are not following closely. I think many are driven by any excuse to throw daggers at the AAC and “city and directional schools”.

(07-03-2020 11:34 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:29 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 08:14 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I would say once UConn moves to the Big East the Big East should become a lot stronger than the AAC. If I were Temple and I could join the Big East even if it meant I'd have to be independent or be in a lesser conference in football, I'd do it.

uconn has been bad in basketball for 6 seasons in a row now, why would losing uconn change anything about any dynamics

also uconn football is completely abysmal and has shown zero signs they will ever be competitive..temple is good in football and regularly in the conversation for the aac title

so you recommend temple sacrifices football, what makes by far the most money in college athletics, to leave a multi-bid basketball league where temple has already made the tourney multiple times, just to go join a slightly better multi-bid conference

In seven years in the AAC Temple's made it twice and one was a First Four loss. In Dunphy's seven years in the A-10 they made it the last six years. The AAC has been very bad for Temple men's basketball. You can say the Big East is "slightly better" in basketball now but again you have to account for UConn moving to the BE so will the BE be slightly better a few years from now? Temple had to drop sports (baseball, softball) because of the AAC. Maybe they can afford to get them back if they didn't have to travel to Texas several games a year. Now is football important enough to make up for those things? Temple isn't UConn and it's a moot point because Villanova won't want Temple in the Big East anyway.

you speak in generalities without any research into any topic.. you look at surface level stats and remove any remote context

temple was in for a massive rebuild in 2013-14 that would have happened irregardless of conference, it was pure coincidence that it was the 1st year of the aac... their first year in the aac they lost a ton of non-conference games before ever playing a second of aac basketball..they won 9 games that season
a-10 or aac temple was in a for some struggles those years..
there is no one who legitimately follows the temple actually thinks the conference has anything to do with their struggles...

even the next few years..temple is going to struggle not becuase of anything other that aaron mckie isnt a good coach and cant recruit ..their roster for next year looks abysmal ..even comparative to current a10 rosters, not to mention big east (imo mckie will be fired in 2 seasons)

i also want to point out that saying temple had to drop sports because of the aac is a really bad point...the aac was the only chance they had to be saved..those sports were planned to be cut in the a10, their AD said they hoped a huge aac/be tv contract would have keep them afloat. when the c7/boise left and it went from 7mil project to 3 mill (at that time), they knew they had to make the cuts ..
the a10 was making less than 200k at that time for it tv deal, its dumb to insinuate that coming to the aac was the issue (note temple had 24 sports then, more than moost p5)

(07-02-2020 10:31 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  There's a lot of sensitivity about this subject, so let me reiterate my viewpoint:

- Based on performance to date, I can't give credit to the AAC as being in the same class with the P5/Big East. Not enough at-large bids. Not enough deep runs in the tournament except for now ex-member UConn, not many high seeds, no non-conference challenge series with a Power conference (GET ONE WITH THE PAC-12!)*, etc.

- I in no way consider the AAC a mid-major. The Sun Belt is a mid major, and that's being awfully kind because that puts them in the same class with the WCC, MVC, and even the SoCon.

-The AAC is waaaaay underperforming. Every year. Yes, even the P leagues get down where only a third or so make the Tournament. The ACC probably would have had only about 5 out of 15 schools make it this year. But the AAC is capable of getting 5-6 out of 11 teams make it. ECU, Tulane, and USF are the only programs who shouldn't be contending for NCAA bids every year. But until the AAC starts living up to its potential, I can't put them in the same class with the other leagues.

*Why hasn't the AAC bent over backwards trying to set up a challenge series with the Pac-12? This would be a symbolic way to differentiate the conference from non power leagues and to associate with power leagues. The Pac-12 would be the perfect candidate for the AAC, and vice versa. All the other leagues have at least one other challenge with another:
ACC vs. Big Ten
Big Ten vs. Big East
Big East vs. Big 12
Big 12 vs. SEC

The AAC is on the outside looking in, but so is the Pac-12.

The Pac-12 is starting up a challenge with the Big 12 in basketball, which was to begin this fall. There is no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major conference. They already have the WCC and MWC schools on their schedules. Oregon did play Houston this season at home, winning 78-66. Houston beat Washington in the championship game of the Diamond Head Classic, 75-71. The Cougars ended up in the final AP poll as the 22nd ranked the team in the country and a lock for the NCAA Tournament. If the Pac-12 is going to play an AAC school, that should be an agreement between the schools. Playing Houston, Cincinnati and Wichita State in home-and-home games probably makes sense.

I would not agree that the Pac-12 is on the "outside looking in," but they have not been tearing it up lately, either. This season was shaping up well, with about 6 or 7 teams projected to make the NCAA tournament, until the cancellation of the season. Outside the conference, they played well. Colorado beat Dayton, Utah beat Kentucky, and Washington beat Baylor. Dayton, Kentucky and Baylor finished the season in the top ten. In conference play, they spent the season beating up on each other. Oregon, the conference regular season champion, lost at Oregon State and at Washington State. That Washington team that beat Baylor landed in last place in the conference at 5-13, despite having two players projected to be selected in the NBA Draft, whenever that happens.

I don’t think being classified as a mid-major is an insult, but if you guys want the AAC to be classified as something other than a mid-major, then come up with something that makes sense. To me, the AAC is a high mid-major and a G5 conference. The best G5 conference with a very good TV deal. To be a power conference in basketball, the conference needs to recruit better talent and perform better in the NCAA Tournament.

(07-03-2020 01:30 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 11:34 AM)schmolik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:29 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 08:14 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I would say once UConn moves to the Big East the Big East should become a lot stronger than the AAC. If I were Temple and I could join the Big East even if it meant I'd have to be independent or be in a lesser conference in football, I'd do it.

uconn has been bad in basketball for 6 seasons in a row now, why would losing uconn change anything about any dynamics

also uconn football is completely abysmal and has shown zero signs they will ever be competitive..temple is good in football and regularly in the conversation for the aac title

so you recommend temple sacrifices football, what makes by far the most money in college athletics, to leave a multi-bid basketball league where temple has already made the tourney multiple times, just to go join a slightly better multi-bid conference

In seven years in the AAC Temple's made it twice and one was a First Four loss. In Dunphy's seven years in the A-10 they made it the last six years. The AAC has been very bad for Temple men's basketball. You can say the Big East is "slightly better" in basketball now but again you have to account for UConn moving to the BE so will the BE be slightly better a few years from now? Temple had to drop sports (baseball, softball) because of the AAC. Maybe they can afford to get them back if they didn't have to travel to Texas several games a year. Now is football important enough to make up for those things? Temple isn't UConn and it's a moot point because Villanova won't want Temple in the Big East anyway.

you speak in generalities without any research into any topic.. you look at surface level stats and remove any remote context

temple was in for a massive rebuild in 2013-14 that would have happened irregardless of conference, it was pure coincidence that it was the 1st year of the aac... their first year in the aac they lost a ton of non-conference games before ever playing a second of aac basketball..they won 9 games that season
a-10 or aac temple was in a for some struggles those years..
there is no one who legitimately follows the temple actually thinks the conference has anything to do with their struggles...

even the next few years..temple is going to struggle not becuase of anything other that aaron mckie isnt a good coach and cant recruit ..their roster for next year looks abysmal ..even comparative to current a10 rosters, not to mention big east (imo mckie will be fired in 2 seasons)

i also want to point out that saying temple had to drop sports because of the aac is a really bad point...the aac was the only chance they had to be saved..those sports were planned to be cut in the a10, their AD said they hoped a huge aac/be tv contract would have keep them afloat. when the c7/boise left and it went from 7mil project to 3 mill (at that time), they knew they had to make the cuts ..
the a10 was making less than 200k at that time for it tv deal, its dumb to insinuate that coming to the aac was the issue (note temple had 24 sports then, more than moost p5)

The AAC gives Temple more $ than the A-10 did. Their travel costs/distances are also way higher. Those are facts. Could Temple have afforded their other sports if they only had to travel to St. Joe's and LaSalle as opposed to Houston and SMU even though they make a lot less money?

Why is Temple not as good now as they used to be? The conference certainly is tougher. McKie isn't Dunphy (although it was one season). But playing a lot of your conference games over 1000 miles away from home and in another time zone is going to suck. How do you attract players to play for you? UConn suffered in the AAC too. They won the 2014 national championship with players mostly recruited while they were still in the Big East. Even the UConn women have declined in the AAC. They haven't won a national championship since 2016, that's an eternity for them. Who wants to play for a school when you have to spend most of your time on the road? At least when UConn was still in the BE Temple could count on the "close" trip to UConn. Now they won't even have that.

The AAC works for Houston. They got a great in state rival in SMU and Tulsa and Tulane aren't that far away. It doesn't work for Temple. Too bad the Big East and AAC can't trade Temple and Creighton. Both would fit better geographically. The furthest west for the BE would be DePaul and Marquette and the furthest trip from Texas for the AAC would be Cincinnati. The AAC can go to a full 9 game round robin schedule in football.

(07-03-2020 01:38 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  The Pac-12 is starting up a challenge with the Big 12 in basketball, which was to begin this fall. There is no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major conference. They already have the WCC and MWC schools on their schedules. Oregon did play Houston this season at home, winning 78-66. Houston beat Washington in the championship game of the Diamond Head Classic, 75-71. The Cougars ended up in the final AP poll as the 22nd ranked the team in the country and a lock for the NCAA Tournament. If the Pac-12 is going to play an AAC school, that should be an agreement between the schools. Playing Houston, Cincinnati and Wichita State in home-and-home games probably makes sense.

I would not agree that the Pac-12 is on the "outside looking in," but they have not been tearing it up lately, either. This season was shaping up well, with about 6 or 7 teams projected to make the NCAA tournament, until the cancellation of the season. Outside the conference, they played well. Colorado beat Dayton, Utah beat Kentucky, and Washington beat Baylor. Dayton, Kentucky and Baylor finished the season in the top ten. In conference play, they spent the season beating up on each other. Oregon, the conference regular season champion, lost at Oregon State and at Washington State. That Washington team that beat Baylor landed in last place in the conference at 5-13, despite having two players projected to be selected in the NBA Draft, whenever that happens.

I don’t think being classified as a mid-major is an insult, but if you guys want the AAC to be classified as something other than a mid-major, then come up with something that makes sense. To me, the AAC is a high mid-major and a G5 conference. The best G5 conference with a very good TV deal. To be a power conference in basketball, the conference needs to recruit better talent and perform better in the NCAA Tournament.

your entire paragraph in either misinformed or purposefully manipulative

" no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major "....the sec and aac ALREADY have a challenge your point makes no sense....

then you are overhyping the pac 12, they only had 4 solidly into the tourney...they were about not send 6-7..they had 3 other bubble teams its presumptuous to think they were getting in...specially with them playing each other in the pac 12 tourney ..5 was their likely total, only 1 with a high seed

and you highlighted Utah who isnt even in convo at all for the tourney, you note Washington beat baylor then note that washington didnt even do that well in the pac 12
nowhere mentioning the academic disqualification of quade green, that destroyed their season (the only true pg on roster)...the washington that played baylor wasnt the same one that played in the pac12 and you know this..

the aac isnt mid major..ive noted this before no site that specializes in mid major basketball/NONE/ include the aac..

ESPN divides articles into mid-major and high major....
ESPN divides them as the p5, Big East, AAC as high major....and the rest as mid major
here is ann example: https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket...jor-anyway

(07-03-2020 02:19 PM)schmolik Wrote:  The AAC gives Temple more $ than the A-10 did. Their travel costs/distances are also way higher. Those are facts. Could Temple have afforded their other sports if they only had to travel to St. Joe's and LaSalle as opposed to Houston and SMU even though they make a lot less money?

Why is Temple not as good now as they used to be? The conference certainly is tougher. McKie isn't Dunphy (although it was one season). But playing a lot of your conference games over 1000 miles away from home and in another time zone is going to suck. How do you attract players to play for you? UConn suffered in the AAC too. They won the 2014 national championship with players mostly recruited while they were still in the Big East. Even the UConn women have declined in the AAC. They haven't won a national championship since 2016, that's an eternity for them. Who wants to play for a school when you have to spend most of your time on the road? At least when UConn was still in the BE Temple could count on the "close" trip to UConn. Now they won't even have that.

The AAC works for Houston. They got a great in state rival in SMU and Tulsa and Tulane aren't that far away. It doesn't work for Temple. Too bad the Big East and AAC can't trade Temple and Creighton. Both would fit better geographically. The furthest west for the BE would be DePaul and Marquette and the furthest trip from Texas for the AAC would be Cincinnati. The AAC can go to a full 9 game round robin schedule in football.

again their AD already said they had been in talks to cut all those sports before the aac was ever in question
he publicly said that they were hoping the aac tv deal would be their saving grace. but the c7/boise leaving reduced the amount they hope for.
those sports were also cut before they even played a single season in the aac. do you genuinely think those sports were operating in the green in the a10 and then without trying just decided to cut these 100 year old sports before joining the aac??
no offense your logic on this is very bad

-who ever said travel cost difference was the issue--again you are making up you own theories with no evidence
here is evidence for you, the a10 information isnt online, but theres an article of total expense for major baseball conferences online that covers other conferences...the difference in expenses for a extremely regional conference like the wcc and big west and the aac was less than 100k..the aac baseball teams had expenses of 1.6mil, wcc/bigwest had expenses of 1.5 mil

the rest of your points and bad or weak manipulation..you point out things that went bad but ignore things that went good...
---uconn recruited elite players in the aac- no one had more 4 and 5stars than uconn in the aac for mens basketball...your recruiting point is disproven with basic 5 seconds of research..they just didnt win
---the aac drastically reduced the number of conference women basketball game so uconn could load up top level non con...also noting that the big east is a similar level to aac in womens hoops (the 3rd best BE team was 19-13 last season)..realignment did hurt uconn womens, in the aspect that their main conference rivals went to the acc..nothing the big east/aac/a10 would have don about that
--- some how the travel didnt affect temple football that was horrific in the a10, now a regular top 25 contender in the aac

you are making up bad theories with no evidence to actually support it

(07-03-2020 02:32 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 01:38 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  The Pac-12 is starting up a challenge with the Big 12 in basketball, which was to begin this fall. There is no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major conference. They already have the WCC and MWC schools on their schedules. Oregon did play Houston this season at home, winning 78-66. Houston beat Washington in the championship game of the Diamond Head Classic, 75-71. The Cougars ended up in the final AP poll as the 22nd ranked the team in the country and a lock for the NCAA Tournament. If the Pac-12 is going to play an AAC school, that should be an agreement between the schools. Playing Houston, Cincinnati and Wichita State in home-and-home games probably makes sense.

I would not agree that the Pac-12 is on the "outside looking in," but they have not been tearing it up lately, either. This season was shaping up well, with about 6 or 7 teams projected to make the NCAA tournament, until the cancellation of the season. Outside the conference, they played well. Colorado beat Dayton, Utah beat Kentucky, and Washington beat Baylor. Dayton, Kentucky and Baylor finished the season in the top ten. In conference play, they spent the season beating up on each other. Oregon, the conference regular season champion, lost at Oregon State and at Washington State. That Washington team that beat Baylor landed in last place in the conference at 5-13, despite having two players projected to be selected in the NBA Draft, whenever that happens.

I don’t think being classified as a mid-major is an insult, but if you guys want the AAC to be classified as something other than a mid-major, then come up with something that makes sense. To me, the AAC is a high mid-major and a G5 conference. The best G5 conference with a very good TV deal. To be a power conference in basketball, the conference needs to recruit better talent and perform better in the NCAA Tournament.

your entire paragraph in either misinformed or purposefully manipulative

" no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major "....the sec and aac ALREADY have a challenge your point makes no sense....

then you are overhyping the pac 12, they only had 4 solidly into the tourney...they were about not send 6-7..they had 3 other bubble teams its presumptuous to think they were getting in...specially with them playing each other in the pac 12 tourney ..5 was their likely total, only 1 with a high seed

and you highlighted Utah who isnt even in convo at all for the tourney, you note Washington beat baylor then note that washington didnt even do that well in the pac 12
nowhere mentioning the academic disqualification of quade green, that destroyed their season (the only true pg on roster)...the washington that played baylor wasnt the same one that played in the pac12 and you know this..

the aac isnt mid major..ive noted this before no site that specializes in mid major basketball/NONE/ include the aac..

ESPN divides articles into mid-major and high major....
ESPN divides them as the p5, Big East, AAC as high major....and the rest as mid major
here is ann example: https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket...jor-anyway

You need to work on those reading comprehension skills. Michael in Raleigh suggested that it would be a good idea for the AAC and Pac-12 to have a challenge series. The Pac-12 had just started one with the Big 12 and starting one with a mid-major conference made no sense to me, especially considering the fact that there are plenty of good mid-major schools to play in the west, schools that they already schedule in non-conference. I had no idea that the AAC and SEC have a challenge series and that is completely irrelevant to the Pac-12.

Joe Lunardi from ESPN had the Pac-12 getting seven schools in:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ration/281

Jerry Palm had the Pac-12 getting six schools in:
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...cketology/

Six seemed realistic considering the conference was ranked 4th in the nation in Net Ranking. We will never know because we didn't have a tournament. On Washington, the loss of their point guard hurt, but that alone does not explain their struggles. Plus, they went into Arizona and swept ASU and UA.

This debate on the status of the AAC is ridiculous. It is not a power conference. It is a high mid-major, if that makes you feel better. They need better talent to get to the next level. They have some great coaches, they just need someone to emerge as a Gonzaga type of program. Gonzaga ranked 13th in basketball recruiting in 2020. They are competing with the power conference schools. UConn is ranked 21st in recruiting for 2020. They are going to be a great addition to the Big East. This is what the AAC needs.

(07-03-2020 12:07 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 11:55 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 10:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:59 AM)bullet Wrote:  AAC is clearly below the P5 and Big East. Still don't know that I would call them a "tweener." I think of a tweener as like the ACC and WAC in football in the 80s. It was considered really odd when a Clemson or BYU won an MNC. It would not be considered odd if Cincinnati or Memphis or Houston won a title in basketball. A P5 or BE school wouldn't be embarrassed by losing to an AAC school.

Well, since neither Houston nor Memphis has ever won a hoops national title, and Cincy hasn't in almost 60 years, I think that would be considered very unusual, very surprising.

As for the ACC in the 1970s and 1980s, yes, a "tweener" is a good way to describe their football, and it was an underdog upset when Clemson won the 1981 national title, I remember that well. However, Clemson at that time was clearly above any AAC teams is right now in terms of football history and pedigree. The ACC added FSU precisely to move off the "tweener" bubble and position themselves as a power league.

I would say that Clemson winning the 1981 football title was not regarded then as being as much of an upset as any of the AAC schools you mentioned winning a hoops title would be now.

I typically agree with you, and often strongly, Quo. But I disagree with this somewhat.

You know how close Houston and Memphis came to winning it all (they both likely should have) and that Cincy has been to a Final Four since 1990. These are three programs for which going back to the Final Four in the future would be less surprising or unusual than seeing two thirds of the members of the P6 do so. And I'm not suggesting you would argue, for example, that Houston making a Final Four would be more unusual than, say, Cal or TCU or Northwestern or Boston College or ... doing so. Just being clear on this.

Clemson in 1981 was unusual because, back then, the ACC was — shall we say "modest" — in football. And for a program (even a strong one) from that league to win a national title ... unusual.

An AAC team winning a national title in men's hoops today would not necessarily be a full "upset" if that team were loaded and well coached. Yes, it would be a bit unexpected and beyond the norm. But not "very surprising" as you note. I would probably go with "somewhat surprising."

Eh ... Memphis almost won a title 12 years ago that would have been stripped anyway. They haven't officially been to the Final 4 since the Nixon administration. Cincy hasn't been to a Final 4 since the George HW Bush administration. Houston hasn't since the Reagan administration.

Clemson in the 1970s and leading up to 1981 was an often-ranked team and they had a pedigree going back decades. They were the ACC's football flagship.

So just using my memory, I believe that Clemson winning that title was not as much a shock as any of the three AAC teams you mention would be in hoops. Now BYU in 1984? That's another story.

Ah, yes. The Tiger meltdown in the 2008 national title game. Of note, and confident Memphis would win, I had printed 100 T-shirts to honor the Final Four legacies of the program's power trio of coaching chiselers: Gene "Anything But Clean" Bartow, Dana "The Bamboozler" Kirk and "Snake Oil Salesman" Johnny C.

The T-shirts read:

"Bartow, Kirk, Calipari ... The Third Cheater Was The Charm

Tiger High: 2008 NCAA Tournament Champs"

Sadly, Goodwill won't even take the shirts off my hands.

(07-03-2020 04:59 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 02:32 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 01:38 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  The Pac-12 is starting up a challenge with the Big 12 in basketball, which was to begin this fall. There is no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major conference. They already have the WCC and MWC schools on their schedules. Oregon did play Houston this season at home, winning 78-66. Houston beat Washington in the championship game of the Diamond Head Classic, 75-71. The Cougars ended up in the final AP poll as the 22nd ranked the team in the country and a lock for the NCAA Tournament. If the Pac-12 is going to play an AAC school, that should be an agreement between the schools. Playing Houston, Cincinnati and Wichita State in home-and-home games probably makes sense.

I would not agree that the Pac-12 is on the "outside looking in," but they have not been tearing it up lately, either. This season was shaping up well, with about 6 or 7 teams projected to make the NCAA tournament, until the cancellation of the season. Outside the conference, they played well. Colorado beat Dayton, Utah beat Kentucky, and Washington beat Baylor. Dayton, Kentucky and Baylor finished the season in the top ten. In conference play, they spent the season beating up on each other. Oregon, the conference regular season champion, lost at Oregon State and at Washington State. That Washington team that beat Baylor landed in last place in the conference at 5-13, despite having two players projected to be selected in the NBA Draft, whenever that happens.

I don’t think being classified as a mid-major is an insult, but if you guys want the AAC to be classified as something other than a mid-major, then come up with something that makes sense. To me, the AAC is a high mid-major and a G5 conference. The best G5 conference with a very good TV deal. To be a power conference in basketball, the conference needs to recruit better talent and perform better in the NCAA Tournament.

your entire paragraph in either misinformed or purposefully manipulative

" no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major "....the sec and aac ALREADY have a challenge your point makes no sense....

then you are overhyping the pac 12, they only had 4 solidly into the tourney...they were about not send 6-7..they had 3 other bubble teams its presumptuous to think they were getting in...specially with them playing each other in the pac 12 tourney ..5 was their likely total, only 1 with a high seed

and you highlighted Utah who isnt even in convo at all for the tourney, you note Washington beat baylor then note that washington didnt even do that well in the pac 12
nowhere mentioning the academic disqualification of quade green, that destroyed their season (the only true pg on roster)...the washington that played baylor wasnt the same one that played in the pac12 and you know this..

the aac isnt mid major..ive noted this before no site that specializes in mid major basketball/NONE/ include the aac..

ESPN divides articles into mid-major and high major....
ESPN divides them as the p5, Big East, AAC as high major....and the rest as mid major
here is ann example: https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket...jor-anyway

You need to work on those reading comprehension skills. Michael in Raleigh suggested that it would be a good idea for the AAC and Pac-12 to have a challenge series. The Pac-12 had just started one with the Big 12 and starting one with a mid-major conference made no sense to me, especially considering the fact that there are plenty of good mid-major schools to play in the west, schools that they already schedule in non-conference. I had no idea that the AAC and SEC have a challenge series and that is completely irrelevant to the Pac-12.

Joe Lunardi from ESPN had the Pac-12 getting seven schools in:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ration/281

Jerry Palm had the Pac-12 getting six schools in:
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...cketology/

Six seemed realistic considering the conference was ranked 4th in the nation in Net Ranking. We will never know because we didn't have a tournament. On Washington, the loss of their point guard hurt, but that alone does not explain their struggles. Plus, they went into Arizona and swept ASU and UA.

This debate on the status of the AAC is ridiculous. It is not a power conference. It is a high mid-major, if that makes you feel better. They need better talent to get to the next level. They have some great coaches, they just need someone to emerge as a Gonzaga type of program. Gonzaga ranked 13th in basketball recruiting in 2020. They are competing with the power conference schools. UConn is ranked 21st in recruiting for 2020. They are going to be a great addition to the Big East. This is what the AAC needs.

i perfectly understood what he was saying..your the one not comprehending my response...
your response was that the pac 12 doesnt need to stoop so low as to do a challenge with a mid-maor (which you are is referring to the aac)..
my point was the sec has a challenge the aac, the aac isnt some lowly mid-major and already has a challenge with another high major

secondly "high-mid-major" is a madeup term not common to the sport..there is clearly tons of evidence the aac is high major, instead of just saying the aac is high major but the lowest high major..you are making and using silly terms
espn, cbs, nbc and all major media outlets label the aac high major...mid-major madness doesnt include the aac..
LINK: https://www.midmajormadness.com/pages/mid-major-teams-by-conference
the cit tourney (mid majors only) doesnt invite aac teams, the cit top 25 (mid major rankings) doesnt rank aac teams .....

last 3 points: "power" is a football term based on autonomy ...if we you want to say the aac isnt a power conference , that is fine..the big east isnt a power conference either,,they dont not have autonomous voting rights as a conference, and they make less money than the aac...Lets not mix basketball and football terms

you clearly dont understand how bracketology works...its ranks you on how you have played/look at that very moment, it is not a predictor of where they think youll finish..
1) the link you posted are preseason 2021 bracketology..not a end of the season 2020 bracketology..your entire evidence is void and useless
2) the pac 12 tournament hadnt been played yet.stanford/ucla/usc were all on the bubble in the last in or last out categories and could not take losses...the problem their games were versus each other, they were guaranteed to eliminate each other...and they were so close to the bubble they all could have been jumped easily if non made tourney runs

this is the exact reason the ncaa committee refused to release a bracket just for consolation sake, it was pure speculation without playing those last few games
also memphis had the #1 recruiting class just last year...it hasnt even been a full year..the aac had the #1 recruiting class..the majority of that memphis class is still on roster for next season

(07-03-2020 12:11 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 12:02 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 11:19 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Can we rename the Realignment Forum the UConn T-Shirt Fan Forum? For Pete’s sake, you guys think more highly of UConn than their own fan base does.

If, C-Ave, you are partly "looking at me" with this post ... Yes, I think highly of UConn men's hoops, women's hoops, baseball and academics. I give credit when due. UConn football is bad. No other way to say it. Has been for years and I seriously doubt the program is going to get much better as an indy.

I defend the AAC and the BE with fairness and consistency. Similarly, I will be constructively critical of the two leagues when needed.

I have noted many times on this board that I am not a "fan" of any single conference (in the strict sense).

My main team is Vanderbilt and nobody on this board is willing to be more critical of the Dores athletics program (in a fair manner, of course) than I am.

My brother teaches at Vanderbilt and attended Cincinnati. We pull hard for the Dores and Bearcats.

And now I'm headed to the grocery store to shop for my elderly parents.

It’s a global observation, not a shot directly at you Bill. I have seen far too many posts over the past few years from random fan of other schools when it is obvious they are not following closely. I think many are driven by any excuse to throw daggers at the AAC and “city and directional schools”.

I'm with you, C-Ave. I'm a Middle Tennessee State University grad living in Nashville — a city with lots of Tennessee fans. So I get the stigma associated with directional schools. At least UCF and USF are located in big cities. ECU is the program with the awkward fit in the AAC, in that respect.

The American is at times unjustly hammered by trash-talking fans who take a odd pleasure in trolling the league's fans. But sometimes we AAC followers unwittingly invite the criticism with exaggerated opinions of and distorted claims regarding the league (I've been guilty of it, too).

As to public urban universities — like Memphis, Houston, Temple and Cincinnati — many of these schools serve a largely disadvantage student population. Thus, the admission rates at such school are often high and the grad rates are often low. And many of those on this board who, again, enjoy "throwing daggers" at the American conveniently overlook that detail as they slam away. They just revel in hammering the American.

If some message board schmoe I don't know personally takes a cheap shot at one of "my teams or leagues," I typically just laugh it off. Now I do push back on the "the AAC is mid-major in men's hoops" posters because I worked in the sports media for years and heard that crap about programs such as Marquette, DePaul, Louisville, UC, UM, etc. when I lightly covered for Athlon the Metro, the Great Midwest and, then, C-USA. Most of these folks are clueless or have an agenda.

(07-03-2020 01:38 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-02-2020 10:31 PM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  There's a lot of sensitivity about this subject, so let me reiterate my viewpoint:

- Based on performance to date, I can't give credit to the AAC as being in the same class with the P5/Big East. Not enough at-large bids. Not enough deep runs in the tournament except for now ex-member UConn, not many high seeds, no non-conference challenge series with a Power conference (GET ONE WITH THE PAC-12!)*, etc.

- I in no way consider the AAC a mid-major. The Sun Belt is a mid major, and that's being awfully kind because that puts them in the same class with the WCC, MVC, and even the SoCon.

-The AAC is waaaaay underperforming. Every year. Yes, even the P leagues get down where only a third or so make the Tournament. The ACC probably would have had only about 5 out of 15 schools make it this year. But the AAC is capable of getting 5-6 out of 11 teams make it. ECU, Tulane, and USF are the only programs who shouldn't be contending for NCAA bids every year. But until the AAC starts living up to its potential, I can't put them in the same class with the other leagues.

*Why hasn't the AAC bent over backwards trying to set up a challenge series with the Pac-12? This would be a symbolic way to differentiate the conference from non power leagues and to associate with power leagues. The Pac-12 would be the perfect candidate for the AAC, and vice versa. All the other leagues have at least one other challenge with another:
ACC vs. Big Ten
Big Ten vs. Big East
Big East vs. Big 12
Big 12 vs. SEC

The AAC is on the outside looking in, but so is the Pac-12.

The Pac-12 is starting up a challenge with the Big 12 in basketball, which was to begin this fall. There is no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major conference. They already have the WCC and MWC schools on their schedules. Oregon did play Houston this season at home, winning 78-66. Houston beat Washington in the championship game of the Diamond Head Classic, 75-71. The Cougars ended up in the final AP poll as the 22nd ranked the team in the country and a lock for the NCAA Tournament. If the Pac-12 is going to play an AAC school, that should be an agreement between the schools. Playing Houston, Cincinnati and Wichita State in home-and-home games probably makes sense.

I would not agree that the Pac-12 is on the "outside looking in," but they have not been tearing it up lately, either. This season was shaping up well, with about 6 or 7 teams projected to make the NCAA tournament, until the cancellation of the season. Outside the conference, they played well. Colorado beat Dayton, Utah beat Kentucky, and Washington beat Baylor. Dayton, Kentucky and Baylor finished the season in the top ten. In conference play, they spent the season beating up on each other. Oregon, the conference regular season champion, lost at Oregon State and at Washington State. That Washington team that beat Baylor landed in last place in the conference at 5-13, despite having two players projected to be selected in the NBA Draft, whenever that happens.

I don’t think being classified as a mid-major is an insult, but if you guys want the AAC to be classified as something other than a mid-major, then come up with something that makes sense. To me, the AAC is a high mid-major and a G5 conference. The best G5 conference with a very good TV deal. To be a power conference in basketball, the conference needs to recruit better talent and perform better in the NCAA Tournament.

If by "mid-major," posters on this board (not you) mean the Memphis and Cincinnati men's hoops programs are on the same level as mid-major programs Belmont and Tennessee State (all four of which, as you likely know by now, I root for) ... then, yes, I am insulted.

I am on full record on this board as noting I do NOT feel the American is a power men's hoops league or ever (realistically) will be. I take a fair and reasonable view of this.

As you correctly note, the AAC needs to recruit better talent and perform better in the NCAA Tournament. Agree fully.

As to the challenge the American has with the SEC in men's basketball ... true, it's a modest arrangement (only four games) but it at least suggests the SEC knows the American is a solid league. So it would not be "beneath" the Pac-12 to have a similar arrangement with the AAC (though I admit it would make zero sense in terms of geography and historical rivalries).

I also feel Pac-12 football and hoops sometimes are unfairly criticized on this board. I wish your league well.

(07-03-2020 10:39 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 10:05 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:29 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 08:14 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I would say once UConn moves to the Big East the Big East should become a lot stronger than the AAC. If I were Temple and I could join the Big East even if it meant I'd have to be independent or be in a lesser conference in football, I'd do it.

uconn has been bad in basketball for 6 seasons in a row now, why would losing uconn change anything about any dynamics

also uconn football is completely abysmal and has shown zero signs they will ever be competitive..temple is good in football and regularly in the conversation for the aac title

so you recommend temple sacrifices football, what makes by far the most money in college athletics, to leave a multi-bid basketball league where temple has already made the tourney multiple times, just to go join a slightly better multi-bid conference

Uconn bb may not have been good for the past few years, but now that they are part of the BE, you will see their recruiting increase big time, because recruits are going to be excited about playing against other bonafied big time elite basketball powers like Villanova, Georgetown St Johns, etc... Uconn will be back, and I hate saying that. But really, no one should be selling Uconn short right now.

To term St. John's as a "big time elite basketball power" is a stretch (and some would contend a "huge stretch"), cuseroc. SJU offers a great history and tradition but ... let's be reasonable.

St Johns is still an elite bb school even though they have been more down than good for a bunch of years. Dont forget that St Johns is top 10 in all time wins and still has more all time wins than anyone in the AAC except maybe Temple, possibly. When they start winning big again, you will be surprised at how much media attention they will garner if you dont think they are an elite basketball power. NYC, Big East, MSG, top 10 all time wins...

(07-03-2020 05:32 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 04:59 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 02:32 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 01:38 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  The Pac-12 is starting up a challenge with the Big 12 in basketball, which was to begin this fall. There is no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major conference. They already have the WCC and MWC schools on their schedules. Oregon did play Houston this season at home, winning 78-66. Houston beat Washington in the championship game of the Diamond Head Classic, 75-71. The Cougars ended up in the final AP poll as the 22nd ranked the team in the country and a lock for the NCAA Tournament. If the Pac-12 is going to play an AAC school, that should be an agreement between the schools. Playing Houston, Cincinnati and Wichita State in home-and-home games probably makes sense.

I would not agree that the Pac-12 is on the "outside looking in," but they have not been tearing it up lately, either. This season was shaping up well, with about 6 or 7 teams projected to make the NCAA tournament, until the cancellation of the season. Outside the conference, they played well. Colorado beat Dayton, Utah beat Kentucky, and Washington beat Baylor. Dayton, Kentucky and Baylor finished the season in the top ten. In conference play, they spent the season beating up on each other. Oregon, the conference regular season champion, lost at Oregon State and at Washington State. That Washington team that beat Baylor landed in last place in the conference at 5-13, despite having two players projected to be selected in the NBA Draft, whenever that happens.

I don’t think being classified as a mid-major is an insult, but if you guys want the AAC to be classified as something other than a mid-major, then come up with something that makes sense. To me, the AAC is a high mid-major and a G5 conference. The best G5 conference with a very good TV deal. To be a power conference in basketball, the conference needs to recruit better talent and perform better in the NCAA Tournament.

your entire paragraph in either misinformed or purposefully manipulative

" no reason to start up a challenge with a mid-major "....the sec and aac ALREADY have a challenge your point makes no sense....

then you are overhyping the pac 12, they only had 4 solidly into the tourney...they were about not send 6-7..they had 3 other bubble teams its presumptuous to think they were getting in...specially with them playing each other in the pac 12 tourney ..5 was their likely total, only 1 with a high seed

and you highlighted Utah who isnt even in convo at all for the tourney, you note Washington beat baylor then note that washington didnt even do that well in the pac 12
nowhere mentioning the academic disqualification of quade green, that destroyed their season (the only true pg on roster)...the washington that played baylor wasnt the same one that played in the pac12 and you know this..

the aac isnt mid major..ive noted this before no site that specializes in mid major basketball/NONE/ include the aac..

ESPN divides articles into mid-major and high major....
ESPN divides them as the p5, Big East, AAC as high major....and the rest as mid major
here is ann example: https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket...jor-anyway

You need to work on those reading comprehension skills. Michael in Raleigh suggested that it would be a good idea for the AAC and Pac-12 to have a challenge series. The Pac-12 had just started one with the Big 12 and starting one with a mid-major conference made no sense to me, especially considering the fact that there are plenty of good mid-major schools to play in the west, schools that they already schedule in non-conference. I had no idea that the AAC and SEC have a challenge series and that is completely irrelevant to the Pac-12.

Joe Lunardi from ESPN had the Pac-12 getting seven schools in:
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ration/281

Jerry Palm had the Pac-12 getting six schools in:
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basket...cketology/

Six seemed realistic considering the conference was ranked 4th in the nation in Net Ranking. We will never know because we didn't have a tournament. On Washington, the loss of their point guard hurt, but that alone does not explain their struggles. Plus, they went into Arizona and swept ASU and UA.

This debate on the status of the AAC is ridiculous. It is not a power conference. It is a high mid-major, if that makes you feel better. They need better talent to get to the next level. They have some great coaches, they just need someone to emerge as a Gonzaga type of program. Gonzaga ranked 13th in basketball recruiting in 2020. They are competing with the power conference schools. UConn is ranked 21st in recruiting for 2020. They are going to be a great addition to the Big East. This is what the AAC needs.

i perfectly understood what he was saying..your the one not comprehending my response...
your response was that the pac 12 doesnt need to stoop so low as to do a challenge with a mid-maor (which you are is referring to the aac)..
my point was the sec has a challenge the aac, the aac isnt some lowly mid-major and already has a challenge with another high major

secondly "high-mid-major" is a madeup term not common to the sport..there is clearly tons of evidence the aac is high major, instead of just saying the aac is high major but the lowest high major..you are making and using silly terms
espn, cbs, nbc and all major media outlets label the aac high major...mid-major madness doesnt include the aac..
LINK: https://www.midmajormadness.com/pages/mid-major-teams-by-conference
the cit tourney (mid majors only) doesnt invite aac teams, the cit top 25 (mid major rankings) doesnt rank aac teams .....

last 3 points: "power" is a football term based on autonomy ...if we you want to say the aac isnt a power conference , that is fine..the big east isnt a power conference either,,they dont not have autonomous voting rights as a conference, and they make less money than the aac...Lets not mix basketball and football terms

you clearly dont understand how bracketology works...its ranks you on how you have played/look at that very moment, it is not a predictor of where they think youll finish..
1) the link you posted are preseason 2021 bracketology..not a end of the season 2020 bracketology..your entire evidence is void and useless
2) the pac 12 tournament hadnt been played yet.stanford/ucla/usc were all on the bubble in the last in or last out categories and could not take losses...the problem their games were versus each other, they were guaranteed to eliminate each other...and they were so close to the bubble they all could have been jumped easily if non made tourney runs

this is the exact reason the ncaa committee refused to release a bracket just for consolation sake, it was pure speculation without playing those last few games
also memphis had the #1 recruiting class just last year...it hasnt even been a full year..the aac had the #1 recruiting class..the majority of that memphis class is still on roster for next season

Eh. I wouldn't argue with any of these haters to much. They claim different schools and or programs and then make sure that they destroy the AAC no matter what, no matter what you prove. However "Real" fans of p5 schools don't really care enough to comment because the AAC is not a threat to them. Then you have fans of nothing conferences that only have one agenda and that's to drag the AAC down to make their lesser than conference feel better to themselves,and then you have the NBE fans that are going to make sure that under any circumstances no matter what,that anyone within range will NEVER, EVER, NEVER EVER think that the AAC is anywhere close to the Nova plus group conference. I didn't call out anyone in particular, so no need for the over the top posse of " Memphis fan" to come running to the AAC err,,,NBE rescue.

(07-03-2020 11:38 PM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 10:39 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 10:05 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 09:29 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(07-03-2020 08:14 AM)schmolik Wrote:  I would say once UConn moves to the Big East the Big East should become a lot stronger than the AAC. If I were Temple and I could join the Big East even if it meant I'd have to be independent or be in a lesser conference in football, I'd do it.

uconn has been bad in basketball for 6 seasons in a row now, why would losing uconn change anything about any dynamics

also uconn football is completely abysmal and has shown zero signs they will ever be competitive..temple is good in football and regularly in the conversation for the aac title

so you recommend temple sacrifices football, what makes by far the most money in college athletics, to leave a multi-bid basketball league where temple has already made the tourney multiple times, just to go join a slightly better multi-bid conference

Uconn bb may not have been good for the past few years, but now that they are part of the BE, you will see their recruiting increase big time, because recruits are going to be excited about playing against other bonafied big time elite basketball powers like Villanova, Georgetown St Johns, etc... Uconn will be back, and I hate saying that. But really, no one should be selling Uconn short right now.

To term St. John's as a "big time elite basketball power" is a stretch (and some would contend a "huge stretch"), cuseroc. SJU offers a great history and tradition but ... let's be reasonable.

St Johns is still an elite bb school even though they have been more down than good for a bunch of years. Dont forget that St Johns is top 10 in all time wins and still has more all time wins than anyone in the AAC except maybe Temple, possibly. When they start winning big again, you will be surprised at how much media attention they will garner if you dont think they are an elite basketball power. NYC, Big East, MSG, top 10 all time wins...

If St. John's is an "elite" basketball program/power as you note, then what does that make the Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, Louisville, Villanova and North Carolina programs? "Elite times 10?" There are a handful of elite programs and then there is a "next tier" of about 40 programs that are extremely strong. I place St. John's in that tier.

I agree with you St. John's offers a tremendous history and tradition and is very attractive to coaches and recruits. Mike Anderson is a strong addition to the program. I classify SJU as a "major to high-major" program that is a member of a power league. No doubt, it offers some "elite" characteristics. I simply would not call SJU an "elite program" in the comprehensive sense.

I'm not sure why you mentioned Temple, other than perhaps you confused me with somebody who strongly supports the AAC and is less than fully complimentary/respectful (or is even dismissive) of the Big East. I cheer for programs in both leagues and wish both well.