(10-23-2019 12:33 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 11:23 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:21 AM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  Between the snobbiness of AAC fans, the ignorance of people who know nothing about UAB, but claim to, and the homer-istic opinions of fans of teams that’re “being looked at” by the AAC, this thread has it all. It’s better than cable.

Well, the issue with the BOT from University of Alabama killed UAB's football program would hurt UAB getting into the AAC or other conference. UAB need to break away from UAT to escape the BOT, formed their own BOT, rename themselves and build up.

Boy you sound about as stupid as stupid can be. That is why you are so loved on this board.

(10-22-2019 09:55 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 09:42 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 09:37 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 08:37 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 06:51 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  I highly doubt UAB gets the 12th spot.

Yes, UAB will be playing in a new stadium, but I'm almost certain that it is the city's stadium. I honestly don't know of UAB building any new facilities. Plus, UAB isn't among the top programs in C-USA in athletic budget or coaches salaries, and far from being one of the best among G5 candidates.

WTF are you talking about dude?

According to the most recent numbers, UAB ranks 7th in C-USA in athletic budget...

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

UAB ranks 2nd in C-USA in head football coaches salary... (which is higher than I thought it would be, so congrats.)

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

And, UAB ranks 9th in C-USA in assistant football coaches salary pool.

https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/football/assistant

And, like I stated Birmingham is building a new stadium. Yes, UAB will be playing there, but it is not their stadium. I believe the city will be hosting the World Games there before UAB gets use of the facility.

https://alabamanewscenter.com/2018/12/13/birmingham-starting-work-new-175-million-stadium-bjcc/

They will be the primary tenant.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Being a tenant is problematic. Having an on campus facility is always more desirable.

For example, North Texas plays basketball at the Super Pit, which is owned by the university and not the athletic department. Getting access to the facility can be an issue. That is why the North Texas Athletic Department will be building a new basketball arena just for their teams. It also allows the athletic department to make structural and cosmetic changes, that being a tenant does not allow for.

(10-23-2019 09:41 AM)EvanJ Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 09:00 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  That leaves:

UAB
Georgia Southern
Old Dominion

Realignment has historically shown a consistent ladder of movement, especially new(er) programs that are building their way up the chain. I, personally, would be surprised to see a program from the Sun Belt immediately get called up to the American. History has shown that there would need to be period of time in C-USA first that would precipitate an AAC invitation.

For example, Louisville went from being an Independent, to C-USA, to the Big East (and briefly the AAC) to the ACC. With the exception to Temple and Navy, every football member has had a stop in C-USA. I would guess if there ever was a 12th member in the AAC, it would probably come from C-USA.

C-USA may be more prestigious than the Sun Belt due to the Men's Basketball success of its former members, but this is the second consecutive year that C-USA is the worst FBS conference in the Sagarin.

(10-23-2019 11:17 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  UAB sucked at football and so is ODU. Both have a great men's basketball that could compete right away in AAC. It seems ODU have a better at getting fans to watch football. ODU and ECU fans could drive to each other games to help bump the ticket sales with more fans in the stadiums. ODU just built a brand new on campus stadium which they are ahead of UAB right now. ODU is already spending at the AAC level on athletics. Virginia is a hotbed for both men's basketball and football recruits while Alabama only have football hotbeds. Looking at the overall picture if you want to present yourself in both sports? The state of Virginia is the better place to get into before Alabama. Virginia is number 5 in men's basketball recruits and Alabama is no where in the top 20. Virginia is number 9 in recruitment in football while Alabama is number 7. This is based on the last 5 recruiting classes.

(10-23-2019 11:23 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:21 AM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  Between the snobbiness of AAC fans, the ignorance of people who know nothing about UAB, but claim to, and the homer-istic opinions of fans of teams that’re “being looked at” by the AAC, this thread has it all. It’s better than cable.

Well, the issue with the BOT from University of Alabama killed UAB's football program would hurt UAB getting into the AAC or other conference. UAB need to break away from UAT to escape the BOT, formed their own BOT, rename themselves and build up.

(10-23-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:30 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:26 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:21 AM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  Between the snobbiness of AAC fans, the ignorance of people who know nothing about UAB, but claim to, and the homer-istic opinions of UAB fans, this thread has it all. It’s better than cable.

I think UAB is a good fit for the AAC institutionally. The question for me is whether the new stadium will generate the level of fan support needed. Otherwise, UAB is a strong choice - good institutionally, good market, and good location. But we already have a few teams that struggle with attendance, and I think we should be very cautious about adding another team drawing a 50% full stadium.

UAB is averaging 30,000 this season in a 71,000 seat stadium. Our attendance would be 7th or 8th in the AAC. UAB has average over 26,000 the previous two seasons. Legion Field hurts our attendance. That will change in 2031 when 30,000 in a 40,000 seat stadium won't look as bad as does in a 71,000 seat stadium.

That 30K looks good, but its a very skewed number. 39K was vs Alabama St (who showed up in droves). The second game was about 28K---against S Alabama---another nearby team who helped fill the stadium. For the next two games vs Rice and ODU, where UAB would have to fill the stadium largely on their own, the attendance plummeted to an average of 21,500 over those two games. Worse yet---only 19,511 showed up at the most recent home game despite the fact that UAB is the reigning CUSA champion and is 6-1 right now.

Look, I get it. All G5's have to deal with trying to build attendance---my team has to work at it too. But the rule of thumb is attendance peaks during good years and falls in bad years. So, if a 6-1 team is struggling at the gate in Birmingham, that makes one wonder what the attendance will be when the inevitable sub .500 season rolls around. UAB, ODU, Charlotte, UMass, Georgia State, etc....they all seem to be the same to me. They are all "projects" that represent gambles that may or may not ever pay off. If its all about potential---then Georgia State, with nearly 53K students, located in a metro area of almost 6 million, probably has the greatest potential up side of all the candidates.

(10-23-2019 06:11 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:30 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:26 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:21 AM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  Between the snobbiness of AAC fans, the ignorance of people who know nothing about UAB, but claim to, and the homer-istic opinions of UAB fans, this thread has it all. It’s better than cable.

I think UAB is a good fit for the AAC institutionally. The question for me is whether the new stadium will generate the level of fan support needed. Otherwise, UAB is a strong choice - good institutionally, good market, and good location. But we already have a few teams that struggle with attendance, and I think we should be very cautious about adding another team drawing a 50% full stadium.

UAB is averaging 30,000 this season in a 71,000 seat stadium. Our attendance would be 7th or 8th in the AAC. UAB has average over 26,000 the previous two seasons. Legion Field hurts our attendance. That will change in 2031 when 30,000 in a 40,000 seat stadium won't look as bad as does in a 71,000 seat stadium.

That 30K looks good, but its a very skewed number. 39K was vs Alabama St (who showed up in droves). The second game was about 28K---against S Alabama---another nearby team who helped fill the stadium. For the next two games vs Rice and ODU, where UAB would have to fill the stadium largely on their own, the attendance plummeted to an average of 21,500 over those two games. Worse yet---only 19,511 showed up at the most recent home game despite the fact that UAB is the reigning CUSA champion and is 6-1 right now.

Look, I get it. All G5's have to deal with trying to build attendance---my team has to work at it too. But the rule of thumb is attendance peaks during good years and falls in bad years. So, if a 6-1 team is struggling at the gate in Birmingham, that makes one wonder what the attendance will be when the inevitable sub .500 season rolls around. UAB, ODU, Charlotte, UMass, Georgia State, etc....they all seem to be the same to me. They are all "projects" that represent gambles that may or may not ever pay off. If its all about potential---then Georgia State, with nearly 53K students, located in a metro area of almost 6 million, probably has the greatest potential up side of all the candidates.

So pick and choose legit crowds? HBCU didn't count because they always show up???

(10-23-2019 06:11 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:30 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:26 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:21 AM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  Between the snobbiness of AAC fans, the ignorance of people who know nothing about UAB, but claim to, and the homer-istic opinions of UAB fans, this thread has it all. It’s better than cable.

I think UAB is a good fit for the AAC institutionally. The question for me is whether the new stadium will generate the level of fan support needed. Otherwise, UAB is a strong choice - good institutionally, good market, and good location. But we already have a few teams that struggle with attendance, and I think we should be very cautious about adding another team drawing a 50% full stadium.

UAB is averaging 30,000 this season in a 71,000 seat stadium. Our attendance would be 7th or 8th in the AAC. UAB has average over 26,000 the previous two seasons. Legion Field hurts our attendance. That will change in 2031 when 30,000 in a 40,000 seat stadium won't look as bad as does in a 71,000 seat stadium.

That 30K looks good, but its a very skewed number. 39K was vs Alabama St (who showed up in droves). The second game was about 28K---against S Alabama---another nearby team who helped fill the stadium. For the next two games vs Rice and ODU, where UAB would have to fill the stadium largely on their own, the attendance plummeted to an average of 21,500 over those two games. Worse yet---only 19,511 showed up at the most recent home game despite the fact that UAB is the reigning CUSA champion and is 6-1 right now.

Look, I get it. All G5's have to deal with trying to build attendance---my team has to work at it too. But the rule of thumb is attendance peaks during good years and falls in bad years. So, if a 6-1 team is struggling at the gate in Birmingham, that makes one wonder what the attendance will be when the inevitable sub .500 season rolls around. UAB, ODU, Charlotte, UMass, Georgia State, etc....they all seem to be the same to me. They are all "projects" that represent gambles that may or may not ever pay off. If its all about potential---then Georgia State, with nearly 53K students, located in a metro area of almost 6 million, probably has the greatest potential up side of all the candidates.

So pick and choose legit crowds? HBCU didn't count because they always show up???



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

(10-23-2019 06:44 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 06:11 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:30 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:26 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  I think UAB is a good fit for the AAC institutionally. The question for me is whether the new stadium will generate the level of fan support needed. Otherwise, UAB is a strong choice - good institutionally, good market, and good location. But we already have a few teams that struggle with attendance, and I think we should be very cautious about adding another team drawing a 50% full stadium.

UAB is averaging 30,000 this season in a 71,000 seat stadium. Our attendance would be 7th or 8th in the AAC. UAB has average over 26,000 the previous two seasons. Legion Field hurts our attendance. That will change in 2031 when 30,000 in a 40,000 seat stadium won't look as bad as does in a 71,000 seat stadium.

That 30K looks good, but its a very skewed number. 39K was vs Alabama St (who showed up in droves). The second game was about 28K---against S Alabama---another nearby team who helped fill the stadium. For the next two games vs Rice and ODU, where UAB would have to fill the stadium largely on their own, the attendance plummeted to an average of 21,500 over those two games. Worse yet---only 19,511 showed up at the most recent home game despite the fact that UAB is the reigning CUSA champion and is 6-1 right now.

Look, I get it. All G5's have to deal with trying to build attendance---my team has to work at it too. But the rule of thumb is attendance peaks during good years and falls in bad years. So, if a 6-1 team is struggling at the gate in Birmingham, that makes one wonder what the attendance will be when the inevitable sub .500 season rolls around. UAB, ODU, Charlotte, UMass, Georgia State, etc....they all seem to be the same to me. They are all "projects" that represent gambles that may or may not ever pay off. If its all about potential---then Georgia State, with nearly 53K students, located in a metro area of almost 6 million, probably has the greatest potential up side of all the candidates.

So pick and choose legit crowds? HBCU didn't count because they always show up???



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

lol...I cant believe you of all people are going to criticize that post considering it's last sentence.

(10-23-2019 06:15 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 06:11 PM)panama Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:45 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:30 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:26 AM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  I think UAB is a good fit for the AAC institutionally. The question for me is whether the new stadium will generate the level of fan support needed. Otherwise, UAB is a strong choice - good institutionally, good market, and good location. But we already have a few teams that struggle with attendance, and I think we should be very cautious about adding another team drawing a 50% full stadium.

UAB is averaging 30,000 this season in a 71,000 seat stadium. Our attendance would be 7th or 8th in the AAC. UAB has average over 26,000 the previous two seasons. Legion Field hurts our attendance. That will change in 2031 when 30,000 in a 40,000 seat stadium won't look as bad as does in a 71,000 seat stadium.

That 30K looks good, but its a very skewed number. 39K was vs Alabama St (who showed up in droves). The second game was about 28K---against S Alabama---another nearby team who helped fill the stadium. For the next two games vs Rice and ODU, where UAB would have to fill the stadium largely on their own, the attendance plummeted to an average of 21,500 over those two games. Worse yet---only 19,511 showed up at the most recent home game despite the fact that UAB is the reigning CUSA champion and is 6-1 right now.

Look, I get it. All G5's have to deal with trying to build attendance---my team has to work at it too. But the rule of thumb is attendance peaks during good years and falls in bad years. So, if a 6-1 team is struggling at the gate in Birmingham, that makes one wonder what the attendance will be when the inevitable sub .500 season rolls around. UAB, ODU, Charlotte, UMass, Georgia State, etc....they all seem to be the same to me. They are all "projects" that represent gambles that may or may not ever pay off. If its all about potential---then Georgia State, with nearly 53K students, located in a metro area of almost 6 million, probably has the greatest potential up side of all the candidates.

So pick and choose legit crowds? HBCU didn't count because they always show up???

He does have a point - attendance is sensitive to record at all but the bluest-blood P5s. We at USF are a good example - we can draw 43,000 if the team is genuinely good, but 20,000 if they are lousy.

If a G5 is 6-1 and drawing flies, that is a problem.

(10-22-2019 06:02 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  This is not rocket science.

G4 schools averaging 25K+ football attendance in both 2018 and 2017 in the Eastern, Central or Mountain time zones (can't see us going Paciific)

Air Force
Army
Boise
BYU
Colo St

A 12th team will come from this list. Colo St is rumored to have expressed interest.

After all, $7M per year > $2M which is what the MWC is looking at for TV money. And Colo St has a stadium to pay for.

The Air Force coach's recent comments indicate they might be interested too.

(10-23-2019 04:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 12:33 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 11:23 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(10-23-2019 10:21 AM)Blazer4Life14 Wrote:  Between the snobbiness of AAC fans, the ignorance of people who know nothing about UAB, but claim to, and the homer-istic opinions of fans of teams that’re “being looked at” by the AAC, this thread has it all. It’s better than cable.

Well, the issue with the BOT from University of Alabama killed UAB's football program would hurt UAB getting into the AAC or other conference. UAB need to break away from UAT to escape the BOT, formed their own BOT, rename themselves and build up.

Boy you sound about as stupid as stupid can be. That is why you are so loved on this board.

FWIW, a lot of us DO value DavidSt pretty highly around here. Yes, he's often off in outer space, but it's a price worth paying for his quirky, outside the box thinking.

(10-24-2019 02:16 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 06:02 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  This is not rocket science.

G4 schools averaging 25K+ football attendance in both 2018 and 2017 in the Eastern, Central or Mountain time zones (can't see us going Paciific)

Air Force
Army
Boise
BYU
Colo St

A 12th team will come from this list. Colo St is rumored to have expressed interest.

After all, $7M per year > $2M which is what the MWC is looking at for TV money. And Colo St has a stadium to pay for.

The Air Force coach's recent comments indicate they might be interested too.

DavidSt I suppose counts as rumored. Or perhaps me for saying they are the ONLY MWC school that makes real sense as an All Sports member of the AAC.

BYU is a pipe dream, but AAC membership moves BYU no closer to Power status, probably further, and their schedule is set well into the next decade, with many P5 opponents. Air Force and Boise State have the Olympic Sports problem which simply kills the matter. Army has no interest, and a schedule booked even deeper into the next decade than BYU anyway. Since Army, Navy and Air Force already play each other, joining a conference together might actually lessen the rivalry value, since the conference would take precedence over the Trophy they now play for.

I totally see from the American's perspective how BYU, Boise State, Army and to a lesser extend Air Force make sexy choices. But the equation doesn't work for those schools. It becomes an edge case "if you pull an inside straight flush it works" sort of argument the AAC fans make. But they are all long shots, and I'm sure the American has already informally approached all of them through back door channels and it died there. They'd have certainly moved if the package fit, like it did for Wichita State.

Colorado State could work, but it's not sexy, and I can see how the American is very hesitant to go that direction. Temple, USF, UCF, ECU, and Cincy are probably not thrilled with the idea of playing in the Mountain time zone for Basketball and Volleyball (Football would only be once every four years). And I'm not sure the league is convinced CSU brings enough juice to the table to justify it, even if the school would be a strong member institutionally.

So people look elsewhere. ODU and Rice are the only other schools with budgets even within shouting range of the American. North Texas could get there. But does the American need another school in the same market as SMU (and TCU for that matter) or another in the same market as Houston, which are worse draws? So you have ODU who haven't done much and are an extremely young program.

UAB was a school I suggested a couple years ago, mostly for it's academic level, potential to revive Basketball (why the MVC was interested when they dropped football). But the school is very small for a public. It has only 9,600 undergraduate students, only 3,900 are males. The budget is too small, and the students are tapped out with very high fees just to keep the football program going. There is zero chance they can double their athletic budget to reach the caboose of the AAC. In short the numbers don't work.

You circle back around and you get the same list as before, and the same issues. If the American thinks keeping the CCG and the portion of the ESPN money that depends on it as worth admitting a long term program bet in Colorado State (institutionally they would be near the top of the American), then they will accept them for all sports.

But I think what is more likely is the American will kick the can down the road again in two years with another waiver, and the power schools will decide to end the division rules by then, as part of a larger package to move to 8 playoff teams. That is the bet the American is making, and I think it's a good one. Ironically it make sit easier for the B12 to remain intact.

(10-24-2019 08:13 AM)jwawker Wrote:  

(10-24-2019 02:16 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(10-22-2019 06:02 AM)CougarRed Wrote:  This is not rocket science.

G4 schools averaging 25K+ football attendance in both 2018 and 2017 in the Eastern, Central or Mountain time zones (can't see us going Paciific)

Air Force
Army
Boise
BYU
Colo St

A 12th team will come from this list. Colo St is rumored to have expressed interest.

After all, $7M per year > $2M which is what the MWC is looking at for TV money. And Colo St has a stadium to pay for.

The Air Force coach's recent comments indicate they might be interested too.

DavidSt I suppose counts as rumored. Or perhaps me for saying they are the ONLY MWC school that makes real sense as an All Sports member of the AAC.

BYU is a pipe dream, but AAC membership moves BYU no closer to Power status, probably further, and their schedule is set well into the next decade, with many P5 opponents. Air Force and Boise State have the Olympic Sports problem which simply kills the matter. Army has no interest, and a schedule booked even deeper into the next decade than BYU anyway. Since Army, Navy and Air Force already play each other, joining a conference together might actually lessen the rivalry value, since the conference would take precedence over the Trophy they now play for.

I totally see from the American's perspective how BYU, Boise State, Army and to a lesser extend Air Force make sexy choices. But the equation doesn't work for those schools. It becomes an edge case "if you pull an inside straight flush it works" sort of argument the AAC fans make. But they are all long shots, and I'm sure the American has already informally approached all of them through back door channels and it died there. They'd have certainly moved if the package fit, like it did for Wichita State.

Colorado State could work, but it's not sexy, and I can see how the American is very hesitant to go that direction. Temple, USF, UCF, ECU, and Cincy are probably not thrilled with the idea of playing in the Mountain time zone for Basketball and Volleyball (Football would only be once every four years). And I'm not sure the league is convinced CSU brings enough juice to the table to justify it, even if the school would be a strong member institutionally.

So people look elsewhere. ODU and Rice are the only other schools with budgets even within shouting range of the American. North Texas could get there. But does the American need another school in the same market as SMU (and TCU for that matter) or another in the same market as Houston, which are worse draws? So you have ODU who haven't done much and are an extremely young program.

UAB was a school I suggested a couple years ago, mostly for it's academic level, potential to revive Basketball (why the MVC was interested when they dropped football). But the school is very small for a public. It has only 9,600 undergraduate students, only 3,900 are males. The budget is too small, and the students are tapped out with very high fees just to keep the football program going. There is zero chance they can double their athletic budget to reach the caboose of the AAC. In short the numbers don't work.

You circle back around and you get the same list as before, and the same issues. If the American thinks keeping the CCG and the portion of the ESPN money that depends on it as worth admitting a long term program bet in Colorado State (institutionally they would be near the top of the American), then they will accept them for all sports.

But I think what is more likely is the American will kick the can down the road again in two years with another waiver, and the power schools will decide to end the division rules by then, as part of a larger package to move to 8 playoff teams. That is the bet the American is making, and I think it's a good one. Ironically it make sit easier for the B12 to remain intact.

Colorado State is not interested in abandoning its traditional rivals and taking on all that travel for schools they have no history with.

(10-24-2019 07:54 AM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  If the AAC is proclaiming itself to be a power conference attendance shouldn't be a problem regardless if your program is good or not.

The Big 12 decided not to add programs because they wanted schools that enhanced the conference, not programs they had to build up.

No AAC school currently draws over 50,000, one draws over 40,000, 3 or 4 draws over 30,000. To say if a 6-1 G5 program is only drawing 20,000 is a problem, isn't that one of the reasons we're a G5 program? Ijs......lol.

(10-24-2019 09:47 AM)oliveandblue Wrote:  

(10-24-2019 08:13 AM)jwawker Wrote:  Colorado State is not interested in abandoning its traditional rivals and taking on all that travel for schools they have no history with.

You have a debt to be paid on that new stadium. I understand the rivalry angle, but if you look at what CFB has turned into its the rivalries that often get sacrificed for a greater aim (backyard brawl, keg of nails, border war, lone star game).