With the recent and impending departures of AAC members, the conference should rethink its entire business model. Its G5 competitive advantage is its lucrative media deal, as well as the commitment of member institutions to invest more into college athletics. Unfortunately, the defections of Connecticut/Cincy/UCF/Houston prove that their members will always be at-risk for poaching. To profitably transform the business model, the AAC should consider offering invitations to all CUSA and Sun Belt members…then working with ESPN to design a media rights deal that improves payouts to all member institutions.

Olympic sports realignment is gradually transitioned to a geographic model that reduces administrative costs. Non-revenue sports travel costs are minimized, and two-thirds of conference administration costs can be eliminated. Proposed new geographic base conferences:
AAC West – Wichita State, Tulsa, Tulane, Louisiana, La Monroe, La Tech, SMU, Rice, North Texas, Texas St, UTSA and UTEP. To maintain NCAA conference rights, Memphis and Temple continue to play men’s basketball schedule in this grouping for a few extra years…the AAC West is the rebranded legacy AAC.
AAC South – USF, Memphis, WKU, MTSU, So Miss, Ark State, UAB, Troy, South Ala, FIU and FAU. Six CUSA are already in this grouping…so for NCAA purposes this is the rebranded CUSA.
AAC East – ECU, Temple, Ga Southern, Ga State, Coastal Carolina, App State, Charlotte, Marshall, ODU, Liberty and UMass. To maintain NCAA conference rights, Troy and South Alabama continue to play men’s basketball schedule in this grouping for a few extra years…the AAC East is the rebranded Sun Belt.
To enhance basketball SOS and gain ESPN payouts, cross-geographic competition is required for higher seeded programs (e.g., Wichita State-WKU-Charlotte, etc.).

Football realignment is fluid. The legacy AAC schools are all grandfathered into the “premier” level and gradually transitioned into a British-style relegation model. ESPN would need to pay more for this “premier” level because relegation & promotion ensures reliably strong content. Media payouts for the “premier” level would be at least 2x the other divisions. After a 3-to-5-year transition period, legacy AAC schools are eligible for relegation. Annually, two schools are relegated (and two are promoted). A metric (such as the Massey Composite Index) is used to determine promotion and relegation. Based on the final 2020 Massey Index ranking, the football-only alignment:
AAC Premier Football, East Division – Memphis, USF, ECU, Temple, App State and Coastal Carolina; West Division – Navy, Tulane, Tulsa, SMU, Louisiana and UAB
AAC Coast Football – Marshall, ODU, Charlotte, FAU, FIU, Ga State, Ga Southern, South Alabama, UMass and Liberty
AAC Gulf Football – UTEP, UTSA, Rice, Texas State, North Texas, Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech, Southern Miss, Ark State, MTSU and WKU

The Faustian deal that the AAC is making with ESPN: Guarantee better football content for potential football relegation…even though relegation is years into the future. The AAC is mitigating against the loss of football brands such as UCF, Cincy and Houston (even the basketball brand such as Connecticut). The elite AAC schools should have the resources to stay in the “premier” level. ESPN gets a G5 conference with a much higher overall level of play. The premier division would also be the annual favorite for getting the G5 conference champion into the NY6/CFP. CUSA and Sun Belt get geographically compact conferences at comparable payouts, with the potential for their champions to be promoted into a higher paying football conference.

No. In the title you sad modest. Its anything but.

No one in college sports wants anything to do with an on-the-field promotion/relegation model. It gets proposed all of the time here in different formats, yet it goes completely against the issue that university presidents care wildly more about downside protection the lean years than they do about maximizing revenue in the great years.

Plus, I don't understand why the AAC would ever to agree to this (and I say that as someone that is far from an AAC stan). While the AAC advantage might not be as pronounced over C-USA or the Sun Belt as of now, it's definitely still there.

Let's be blunt: schools are ALWAYS looking for any real or perceived advantage over other institutions. That's why we have a P5/G5 divide (and a further divide even within the P5) in the first place. SMU looks down on UNT and UTSA and doesn't want to be in the same league as them just as I'm sure UVA wouldn't want anything to do with being in a league with Old Dominion.

(10-11-2021 12:02 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  No one in college sports wants anything to do with an on-the-field promotion/relegation model. It gets proposed all of the time here in different formats, yet it goes completely against the issue that university presidents care wildly more about downside protection the lean years than they do about maximizing revenue in the great years.

Plus, I don't understand why the AAC would ever to agree to this (and I say that as someone that is far from an AAC stan). While the AAC advantage might not be as pronounced over C-USA or the Sun Belt as of now, it's definitely still there.

Let's be blunt: schools are ALWAYS looking for any real or perceived advantage over other institutions. That's why we have a P5/G5 divide (and a further divide even within the P5) in the first place. SMU looks down on UNT and UTSA and doesn't want to be in the same league as them just as I'm sure UVA wouldn't want anything to do with being in a league with Old Dominion.

If SMU values academic reputation, then focus on the addition of Rice, Tulane and Tulsa to their academic/geographic club. Somehow the B10 and ACC put aside some academic snobbishness when inviting Nebraska and Louisville...these conferences understood that they needed to improve the overall football product.

SMU's athletic department will have a better opportunity at growing its athletic department brand into a B12-worthy institution if it maintains the AAC premier G5 football conference. SMU football (with its $$$, brand, great recruiting territory and head-start) should be one of the best-positioned programs in this new set-up. SMU's football schedule doesn't change much...it's non-revenue sports that have the major change in schedules.

-----

FWIW - the money issues would be more complex to address, but legacy AAC programs could also be exempted from football relegation. The Premier conference would probably need to grow to 16 members; while the Coast and Gulf conferences lose two additional members. The legacy AAC members would probably lose some payouts for de-risking their football relegation. CUSA and Sun Belt would need greater probability of being financially promoted to current AAC-level status in order to join this permanently uneven venture. Therefore, CUSA and Sun Belt programs have upside benefits (e.g., occasional promotion and increased payouts) and AAC have no downside football relegation.

----
PPS - The reality is that losing Connecticut, Cincy, UCF and Houston has already relegated the remaining AAC members into a different neighborhood (versus the initial envisioned plan). Creating this different operating model provides longer-term stability to all members. In other words, promotions and relegations already occur in FBS conferences...this model is better at preparing the AAC in case Memphis/USF/SMU get an offer from the B12.

At least DavidSt's nonsense posts are funny.

The only time I've ever heard of a college PRO/REL situation being at all realistic was back in the day in the Atlantic 10 for men's soccer.

PRO/REL would NEVER WORK spanning multiple conferences, because of TV money and the perception as they compete with each other for a pecking order. Any G5 cooperation boils down to "We're tied for last" vs "We're 6th and there's a 7th through 10th." No one is going to give up being 6th willingly to join a group saying "We're tied for last."


The only way it's possible is there was ONE SUPER LEAGUE, and four feeder leagues regionally; and the whole thing was ESPN's idea and said "We'll give each of you the same amount of money no matter which group you are in, every year.... And the Super League gets far more exposure and coverage and now can have a schedule good enough to play their way into the CFP."

But ESPN has no financial reason to do that. They'd have to pay the whole G5 as if it was the 6th best conference instead of $7.5 million to 6th place and "production costs" to 10th place.

Now, just because an FBS PRO/REL scenario is just a non-starter off the table, I'll tell you about the A-10 soccer model:

The A-10 soccer model could have worked. This was when Charlotte and Saint Louis were joining the league. Five of 12 teams were good. Seven teams didn't really invest in soccer. Here comes two more for 14: Charlotte was good, SLU was GREAT. It was a one-bid league and the hope was that SLU/CHAR made it a 2 or 3 bid league. But a 13-game schedule would be two more flights and expensive, reduce OOC opportunities for the good teams to win games; and playing 7 bad teams in the regular season would probably crush RPIs.

They wanted a smaller conference schedule and play more OOC games (close on bus trips to save money).

So the idea the men's coaches came up with was a PRO/REL division system: The best 7 teams would be the upper division, the other seven the lower division. The conference tourney would be eight teams: Top 5 from the upper, 3 from the lower. The two teams that didn't make the tourney from the upper would be relegated, top two from the lower promoted.

ALL the coaches loved it:
- The bad teams could win more conference games by avoiding the powers; It gave them access to the A-10 tourney they didn't get before. They could WIN A DIVISION AND HANG A BANNER. Most their Lower Half assistant coaches were part-time. This was going to help the head coaches in the bottom half keep their jobs.

- The upper division coaches thought it was great because it made their conference schedule much stronger by not playing the bad teams in the other division;
- It created MORE OOC games to the schedule, so they could get noticed regionally, then without playing the bad teams, their RPIs would be high. They thought it could make them a 3-bid league.

- The "Tweener" programs liked it because if they were having a good year from the upper, they could possibly get an at-large; but if they were in the lower division, they'd have a great record, but still had a shot at playing the good teams in the tourney and winning it; OR getting two marquee wins if they lost the final.


Unfortunately, the A-10 had told the men's and women's soccer coaches to come up with a model, and they could do so independently. They could vote independently and Men/Women didn't need to have the same model. But when presenting their models, they had to supply a sample of AN ENTIRE SEASON scheduled out, with actual dates.

Showing those sample models side-by-side, Men's model and a Women's model next to each other revealed the flaw...

Half the league did not have LIGHTS on their fields and couldn't play night games. which meant you could not play 2 games on the same day if both Men "& Women happened to be home. "How are four teams going to practice on the field the day before between two getting off a plane, the class schedule of the home students AND SUNSET?"

The A-10 and the coaches all agreed that the Men's/Women's models had to be the same so that one team would be on the road when the other was at home so they could both play Friday/Sunday.

But if everyone had lights, they could have done it and it would have been sweet.

People will watch games, even between teams they're less familiar with, if they know the game is somehow consequential--more than merely another win or loss in the record.

While promotion/relegation might be a bridge too far, the underlying premise of non-autos' cooperation in designing a framework that practically ensures a stout number of high-consequence games in the last 4-6 weeks of the season is to everyone's benefit (ie, among non-auto conferences/schools)... partially because that's an advantage that the autos will never equal because they're almost inherently more conservative, less agile, less flexible, less innovative, and more me-first.

(10-11-2021 11:54 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  With the recent and impending departures of AAC members, the conference should rethink its entire business model. Its G5 competitive advantage is its lucrative media deal, as well as the commitment of member institutions to invest more into college athletics. Unfortunately, the defections of Connecticut/Cincy/UCF/Houston prove that their members will always be at-risk for poaching. To profitably transform the business model, the AAC should consider offering invitations to all CUSA and Sun Belt members…then working with ESPN to design a media rights deal that improves payouts to all member institutions.

Olympic sports realignment is gradually transitioned to a geographic model that reduces administrative costs. Non-revenue sports travel costs are minimized, and two-thirds of conference administration costs can be eliminated. Proposed new geographic base conferences:
AAC West – Wichita State, Tulsa, Tulane, Louisiana, La Monroe, La Tech, SMU, Rice, North Texas, Texas St, UTSA and UTEP. To maintain NCAA conference rights, Memphis and Temple continue to play men’s basketball schedule in this grouping for a few extra years…the AAC West is the rebranded legacy AAC.
AAC South – USF, Memphis, WKU, MTSU, So Miss, Ark State, UAB, Troy, South Ala, FIU and FAU. Six CUSA are already in this grouping…so for NCAA purposes this is the rebranded CUSA.
AAC East – ECU, Temple, Ga Southern, Ga State, Coastal Carolina, App State, Charlotte, Marshall, ODU, Liberty and UMass. To maintain NCAA conference rights, Troy and South Alabama continue to play men’s basketball schedule in this grouping for a few extra years…the AAC East is the rebranded Sun Belt.
To enhance basketball SOS and gain ESPN payouts, cross-geographic competition is required for higher seeded programs (e.g., Wichita State-WKU-Charlotte, etc.).

Football realignment is fluid. The legacy AAC schools are all grandfathered into the “premier” level and gradually transitioned into a British-style relegation model. ESPN would need to pay more for this “premier” level because relegation & promotion ensures reliably strong content. Media payouts for the “premier” level would be at least 2x the other divisions. After a 3-to-5-year transition period, legacy AAC schools are eligible for relegation. Annually, two schools are relegated (and two are promoted). A metric (such as the Massey Composite Index) is used to determine promotion and relegation. Based on the final 2020 Massey Index ranking, the football-only alignment:
AAC Premier Football, East Division – Memphis, USF, ECU, Temple, App State and Coastal Carolina; West Division – Navy, Tulane, Tulsa, SMU, Louisiana and UAB
AAC Coast Football – Marshall, ODU, Charlotte, FAU, FIU, Ga State, Ga Southern, South Alabama, UMass and Liberty
AAC Gulf Football – UTEP, UTSA, Rice, Texas State, North Texas, Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech, Southern Miss, Ark State, MTSU and WKU

The Faustian deal that the AAC is making with ESPN: Guarantee better football content for potential football relegation…even though relegation is years into the future. The AAC is mitigating against the loss of football brands such as UCF, Cincy and Houston (even the basketball brand such as Connecticut). The elite AAC schools should have the resources to stay in the “premier” level. ESPN gets a G5 conference with a much higher overall level of play. The premier division would also be the annual favorite for getting the G5 conference champion into the NY6/CFP. CUSA and Sun Belt get geographically compact conferences at comparable payouts, with the potential for their champions to be promoted into a higher paying football conference.

These garbage proposals are never made by fans of teams in the conferences being discussed. Total crap.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm creating a VERY compelling thread about a conference with UVA, Richmond, Delaware, and Liberty.

Solution for pro/rel and AAC buy-in:

The 8 legacy AAC members cannot be relegated. Easy as that.

All 4 CUSA/SB are on the chopping block at year's end. The 2 "Gulf" and "Coast" champions (if it is re-organized) get promotions and the 3rd and 4th best lower-tier schools play against the 2nd and 1st best Super CUSA/SB team in the bowls. If a Super CUSA/SB team is in the NY6/CFP, that 4th best lower-tier school doesn't get a crack at the Super League.

AAC gets a continuous supply of good football schools; no more ECUs or Tulsas under-delivering for years on end. No revenue-risk with pro/rel.

CUSA/SB get regional play and more consequential CCGs and Bowls. Advancing to the Super League warrants a modest bonus payed out over X years so that it is not boom/bust.

(10-11-2021 11:54 AM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  With the recent and impending departures of AAC members, the conference should rethink its entire business model. Its G5 competitive advantage is its lucrative media deal, as well as the commitment of member institutions to invest more into college athletics. Unfortunately, the defections of Connecticut/Cincy/UCF/Houston prove that their members will always be at-risk for poaching. To profitably transform the business model, the AAC should consider offering invitations to all CUSA and Sun Belt members…then working with ESPN to design a media rights deal that improves payouts to all member institutions.

Olympic sports realignment is gradually transitioned to a geographic model that reduces administrative costs. Non-revenue sports travel costs are minimized, and two-thirds of conference administration costs can be eliminated. Proposed new geographic base conferences:
AAC West – Wichita State, Tulsa, Tulane, Louisiana, La Monroe, La Tech, SMU, Rice, North Texas, Texas St, UTSA and UTEP. To maintain NCAA conference rights, Memphis and Temple continue to play men’s basketball schedule in this grouping for a few extra years…the AAC West is the rebranded legacy AAC.
AAC South – USF, Memphis, WKU, MTSU, So Miss, Ark State, UAB, Troy, South Ala, FIU and FAU. Six CUSA are already in this grouping…so for NCAA purposes this is the rebranded CUSA.
AAC East – ECU, Temple, Ga Southern, Ga State, Coastal Carolina, App State, Charlotte, Marshall, ODU, Liberty and UMass. To maintain NCAA conference rights, Troy and South Alabama continue to play men’s basketball schedule in this grouping for a few extra years…the AAC East is the rebranded Sun Belt.
To enhance basketball SOS and gain ESPN payouts, cross-geographic competition is required for higher seeded programs (e.g., Wichita State-WKU-Charlotte, etc.).

Football realignment is fluid. The legacy AAC schools are all grandfathered into the “premier” level and gradually transitioned into a British-style relegation model. ESPN would need to pay more for this “premier” level because relegation & promotion ensures reliably strong content. Media payouts for the “premier” level would be at least 2x the other divisions. After a 3-to-5-year transition period, legacy AAC schools are eligible for relegation. Annually, two schools are relegated (and two are promoted). A metric (such as the Massey Composite Index) is used to determine promotion and relegation. Based on the final 2020 Massey Index ranking, the football-only alignment:
AAC Premier Football, East Division – Memphis, USF, ECU, Temple, App State and Coastal Carolina; West Division – Navy, Tulane, Tulsa, SMU, Louisiana and UAB
AAC Coast Football – Marshall, ODU, Charlotte, FAU, FIU, Ga State, Ga Southern, South Alabama, UMass and Liberty
AAC Gulf Football – UTEP, UTSA, Rice, Texas State, North Texas, Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech, Southern Miss, Ark State, MTSU and WKU

The Faustian deal that the AAC is making with ESPN: Guarantee better football content for potential football relegation…even though relegation is years into the future. The AAC is mitigating against the loss of football brands such as UCF, Cincy and Houston (even the basketball brand such as Connecticut). The elite AAC schools should have the resources to stay in the “premier” level. ESPN gets a G5 conference with a much higher overall level of play. The premier division would also be the annual favorite for getting the G5 conference champion into the NY6/CFP. CUSA and Sun Belt get geographically compact conferences at comparable payouts, with the potential for their champions to be promoted into a higher paying football conference.

This doesnt really do much of anything. The AAC would be just as vulnerable to P5 poaching as the current AAC set up. The only advantage to this proposal is there's an automatic process to replace any lost teams. But any team that's automatically promoted after a P5 raid is almost certainly a team the AAC could have added anyway. Thats not much of a up side if your ask me.

Worse yet---the price the current AAC membership pays for this dubious convenience of having a quick replacement team is accepting the risk of basically getting kicked out of your conference if you have a bad season. Yeah---how could current AAC member pass up that great deal! I cant imagine a single current AAC member voting for anything like this.

(10-11-2021 11:57 AM)OsageJ Wrote:  No. In the title you sad modest. Its anything but.

To be fair, the original "A Modest Proposal" is also anything but.

Temple
BC
Rutgers
UConn
UVA
VT
Maryland
Pitt
Penn State
Syracuse
Cincy
WVU

(10-12-2021 08:26 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  

(10-11-2021 11:57 AM)OsageJ Wrote:  No. In the title you sad modest. Its anything but.

To be fair, the original "A Modest Proposal" is also anything but.

I was going to say, I thought that was the point.

Though if there was a plan that involved selling and eating children, Penn S hey how about this beautiful fall weather

(10-12-2021 12:29 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(10-12-2021 08:26 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  

(10-11-2021 11:57 AM)OsageJ Wrote:  No. In the title you sad modest. Its anything but.

To be fair, the original "A Modest Proposal" is also anything but.

I was going to say, I thought that was the point.

Though if there was a plan that involved selling and eating children, Penn S hey how about this beautiful fall weather

Can't do satire (about excessive power of The Mouse and the compliant conference commissioner) without some exaggeration.