(10-10-2021 11:39 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  This is a great post. This “stalking horse” option does give those schools who receive the “golden ticket” invite to the AAC an option to consider before paying exit fees from C-USA/Sunbelt and entrance fees to the AAC. The questions these schools will work through are:

1. How long do schools like SMU, Memphis, Navy football/Wichita State basketball and USF stay in the AAC? Same question for any schools thinking about the MWC and Boise State, San Diego State, and others.

Quote:2. What will the new AAC media contract value be?

Quote:3. Is there an “institutional fit” for likely AAC lifers such as Temple, East Carolina, Tulane and Tulsa?[/quote

They may not like it much where they are, but they're not going anywhere. They have nowhere to go. The UMass Plan--A-10 in basketball and Olympic sports, independent in FBS--is not an attractive option.

[quote]4. Do the finances work if I am flying my Olympic sports teams to Tulsa, Philadelphia, and Tampa?

Quote:This will be an interesting week.

(10-10-2021 11:47 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Nothing will happen this week in realignment at the FBS level.

(MVC could announce their 12th at any time, OVC or Southland could make a move to try to bounce back. But nothing at the FBS level).

(10-10-2021 12:15 PM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 11:47 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  Nothing will happen this week in realignment at the FBS level.

(MVC could announce their 12th at any time, OVC or Southland could make a move to try to bounce back. But nothing at the FBS level).

I should have clarified my assumption. Despite the Sunbelt posters here, maybe the Sunbelt is willing to entertain an “eastern time zone” combined conference and a “central time zone” combined conference, plus UTEP. Of course, some overlap exists through Alabama, Tennessee, and Kentucky.

These conferences will have less travel than the AAC but south Florida might be trouble in the east and El Paso is trouble in the west.

(10-09-2021 05:35 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  This makes no sense unless the playoff expands.

Not that I’m against this, but only if the playoff expands.

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  . I can see the logic---but it seems counter intuitive to say that Charlotte, ODU, and UMass would be better options than AppSt, Marshall, and LaTech. Ultimately, its hard for me to buy completely into that theory. I think too many other factors (recruiting grounds, local competition, brand, facilities, etc) enter into that equation to rely simply on athletic budget as the "end all be all" invitation criteria.

(10-10-2021 01:12 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  . I can see the logic---but it seems counter intuitive to say that Charlotte, ODU, and UMass would be better options than AppSt, Marshall, and LaTech. Ultimately, its hard for me to buy completely into that theory. I think too many other factors (recruiting grounds, local competition, brand, facilities, etc) enter into that equation to rely simply on athletic budget as the "end all be all" invitation criteria.

Maybe the logic is from the POV of the current AAC schools.

You want recruiting grounds, and winnable games. So ODU and Charlotte make sense (although ECU is kinda right there....). Play in Norfolk and Charlotte, win the games, pick up recruits in VA and NC, maybe make the playoff. Vs bring in Marshall and App State, maybe lose the games, and there are not a lot of players to recruit in Boone NC and Huntington WV.

UMass though, um, not great in any analysis

(10-10-2021 01:12 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  . I can see the logic---but it seems counter intuitive to say that Charlotte, ODU, and UMass would be better options than AppSt, Marshall, and LaTech. Ultimately, its hard for me to buy completely into that theory. I think too many other factors (recruiting grounds, local competition, brand, facilities, etc) enter into that equation to rely simply on athletic budget as the "end all be all" invitation criteria.

Maybe the logic is from the POV of the current AAC schools.

You want recruiting grounds, and winnable games. So ODU and Charlotte make sense (although ECU is kinda right there....). Play in Norfolk and Charlotte, win the games, pick up recruits in VA and NC, maybe make the playoff. Vs bring in Marshall and App State, maybe lose the games, and there are not a lot of players to recruit in Boone NC and Huntington WV.

UMass though, um, not great in any analysis

(10-10-2021 08:53 AM)All4One Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 11:26 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Only FBS conferences get a cut of the CFP money. Everyone thinks there will be more money in the next CFP deal. There is no way any G conference will give up FBS status.

That's actually not true. Granted, it's not much, and it's a far cry from the $90 Million shared by the Gang of 5 conferences, but still....

Forbes Article

Quote: FCS

$2.7 million collective pool

FCS conferences that provide the full NCAA-allowable complement of scholarships receive a collective pool, which includes the Big Sky, Big South, Colonial, Mid-Eastern, Missouri Valley, Ohio Valley, Southern, Southland, and SWAC.

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 05:35 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  This makes no sense unless the playoff expands.
Not that I’m against this, but only if the playoff expands.

And then it makes even less sense. If the top 6 conference champs get in---then building a conference that can consistently be that #6
conference would be FAR more important at the G5 level than geography. The real question is "What is the AAC strategy for being that 6th conference?".

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 05:35 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  This makes no sense unless the playoff expands.

Not that I’m against this, but only if the playoff expands.

And then it makes even less sense. If the top 6 conference champs get in---then building a conference that can consistently be that #6 conference would be FAR more important at the G5 level than geography. The real question is "What is the AAC strategy for being that 6th conference?”

(10-09-2021 11:26 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 11:19 PM)Crayton Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 11:02 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 10:55 PM)Crayton Wrote:  There are certainly details we don't have yet. CUSA has just as much a chance asking for a reshuffling with the SEC as they do the AAC.

Here are some potential features of whatever plan Delaney has up his sleeve:
1) Drop exit fees when there exists an invitation to another of the 3 conferences
2) Arrange their football conferences separate from Olympic Sports (so that sport no longer "drives" realignment)
3) Shared negotiation with TV partners, at least for their football
4) Shared flex dates for BBall (ya, like CUSA and SB do now)

The questions remain:
1) HOW do you best arrange the football product, and
2) CAN you get current AAC schools the same or better revenue stream?

1. No one is going to forfeit exit fee money unless say a UTEP volunteered to leave a now hypothetical eastern tilting CUSA

2. That would be nice but the NCAA rules don't allow it

The AAC is simply going to take who they want and USM is likely to join the Sunbelt with an Eastern team

I am still trying to figure out what the NCAA holds over these conferences. Half a dozen "non-FBS conferences have FBS teams". Can't the AAC, CUSA, and SB simply become "non-FBS conferences with FBS teams”?

Only FBS conferences get a cut of the CFP money. Everyone thinks there will be more money in the next CFP deal. There is no way any G conference will give up FBS status.

(10-10-2021 03:49 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 05:35 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  This makes no sense unless the playoff expands.

Not that I’m against this, but only if the playoff expands.

And then it makes even less sense. If the top 6 conference champs get in---then building a conference that can consistently be that #6 conference would be FAR more important at the G5 level than geography. The real question is "What is the AAC strategy for being that 6th conference?”

If the goal is to be most likely to get that 6th champ bid in a 6-6 playoff, then maybe the strategy shouldn’t be arguing about top-to-bottom football strength with the MWC. Maybe it should be just adding one new member, playing an 8-game conference schedule with 9 members, and pushing the two or three best football programs in the league to play 2 P opponents every year even if they have to go on the road in nearly all of those games.

Example: If Cincinnati makes the playoff this year, or even if they lose a game and just get the access spot, it won’t be because the AAC won a schlong-measuring contest with the other G conferences, it will be because Cincinnati beat Notre Dame in South Bend.

(10-10-2021 01:12 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  . I can see the logic---but it seems counter intuitive to say that Charlotte, ODU, and UMass would be better options than AppSt, Marshall, and LaTech. Ultimately, its hard for me to buy completely into that theory. I think too many other factors (recruiting grounds, local competition, brand, facilities, etc) enter into that equation to rely simply on athletic budget as the "end all be all" invitation criteria.

Maybe the logic is from the POV of the current AAC schools.

You want recruiting grounds, and winnable games. So ODU and Charlotte make sense (although ECU is kinda right there....). Play in Norfolk and Charlotte, win the games, pick up recruits in VA and NC, maybe make the playoff. Vs bring in Marshall and App State, maybe lose the games, and there are not a lot of players to recruit in Boone NC and Huntington WV. ...

(10-10-2021 06:34 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  None of the candidates has great TV audience, they'd all be at or near the bottom of the AAC; it hardly matters if one has 300K fans per game and another 175K, it's too small to matter. Further none of these schools matches the AAC average budget, and some schools people here list are closer to half the budget size.

Given that reality these schools are back fill mostly. That favors airports and recruiting territories. Without a doubt FAU and UTSA win that. That Charlotte has traction says that ECU is too remote and rural to help with recruiting in NC. It also says that schools like App State and Marshall are not likely to be considered for that same reason. North Texas also fits, but hard to see them taken as SMU already covers DFW and north Texas. I agree that ODU and Charlotte fill the same niche. It's one or the other, not both, and ODU seems to be out of the picture.

My bet would be the American goes to 12 and the four they add are UAB, UTSA, FAU and Charlotte. But it could be they just go to 10 and it could be any two of these.

What the SBC does depends entirely upon what the American does first.

(10-10-2021 05:03 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 03:49 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 12:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 05:35 PM)AuzGrams Wrote:  This makes no sense unless the playoff expands.

Not that I’m against this, but only if the playoff expands.

And then it makes even less sense. If the top 6 conference champs get in---then building a conference that can consistently be that #6 conference would be FAR more important at the G5 level than geography. The real question is "What is the AAC strategy for being that 6th conference?”

If the goal is to be most likely to get that 6th champ bid in a 6-6 playoff, then maybe the strategy shouldn’t be arguing about top-to-bottom football strength with the MWC. Maybe it should be just adding one new member, playing an 8-game conference schedule with 9 members, and pushing the two or three best football programs in the league to play 2 P opponents every year even if they have to go on the road in nearly all of those games.

Example: If Cincinnati makes the playoff this year, or even if they lose a game and just get the access spot, it won’t be because the AAC won a schlong-measuring contest with the other G conferences, it will be because Cincinnati beat Notre Dame in South Bend.

That was happenstance. More often than not---that game wont exist--especially considering the coming Alliance and more nine-game conference schedules. What will matter is more ranked teams in your conference. In 2015, Houston played Vandy and Louisville--neither of which were ranked. But Houston ended up playing 3 ranked teams because Memphis, Navy, and Temple all ended up ranked that year. Eight of the typical G5's 12 games will come from WITHIN the conference (13 if you include the CCG). Improving the internal schedule remains the best way to stay the #6 conference in my opinion.

(10-10-2021 06:51 PM)seaking4steel Wrote:  

(10-10-2021 06:34 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  None of the candidates has great TV audience, they'd all be at or near the bottom of the AAC; it hardly matters if one has 300K fans per game and another 175K, it's too small to matter. Further none of these schools matches the AAC average budget, and some schools people here list are closer to half the budget size.

Given that reality these schools are back fill mostly. That favors airports and recruiting territories. Without a doubt FAU and UTSA win that. That Charlotte has traction says that ECU is too remote and rural to help with recruiting in NC. It also says that schools like App State and Marshall are not likely to be considered for that same reason. North Texas also fits, but hard to see them taken as SMU already covers DFW and north Texas. I agree that ODU and Charlotte fill the same niche. It's one or the other, not both, and ODU seems to be out of the picture.

My bet would be the American goes to 12 and the four they add are UAB, UTSA, FAU and Charlotte. But it could be they just go to 10 and it could be any two of these.

What the SBC does depends entirely upon what the American does first.

App State and Marshall got over 1 Million viewers on ESPN for a Thursday Night game (they were competing against the NFL for views too). App State and ECU got 36k in the stands in Charlotte on a Thursday night. Charlotte couldn't even sell out their small stadium when Duke came to town.