(11-27-2020 04:00 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 12:44 PM)herdfan129 Wrote:  I'm not here to argue with any of you. I will 100% admit that BYU/Army/Air Force/Boise are better ads than Marshall right now. Outside of that, I don't think there's any comparison. Marshall is EASILY the next best, and honestly, only BYU is better as an All Sports invite.

Marshall is well within the conference footprint. A great travel partner for Cincy, we are an R2 research institution, we have a Top 75 media market (that we actually own/control), and we have national name recognition which helps us draw eyeballs outside of our media market.

Our average attendance was down last year, but a lot of people were basically going on strike to get rid of our head coach. We have proven we can easily average 28k/game with an AAC schedule, that's also while we were down at the time. So we could possibly do better if we were winning with an AAC schedule. We have sold out multiple games with P5 opponents over the last few years.

In basketball, we might not have the banners, but we do have the support and have improved over the last few years. We average around 6,000/game which is easily in the top half of AAC. Our attendance would DRASTICALLY increase with an AAC schedule.

Someone asked for TV ratings against other AAC teams. Here are a few from our recent bowl games.

Our last 6 bowl games have an average rating of 1.89 million viewers. I would say that's pretty dang good.

2019 Gasparilla Bowl vs UCF 1.15 million
2018 Gasparilla Bowl vs USF 1.75 million
2017 New Mexico Bowl vs Colorado St 1.21 million

2015 St Petersburg Bowl vs UCONN 2.4 million
2014 Boca Raton Bowl vs NIU 2.25 million
2013 Military Bowl vs Maryland 2.58 million

Our job at Marshall is to continue winning, finishing in the Top 25, and go on another run like we did in the MAC. Getting an AAC invite would be great, but if not, being the Boise St of CUSA wouldn't be so bad either.

I hope I don't come off as too negative in this reply - that is not my intent.
First and foremost, good on ya for being proud of your school. And you are right that Marshall is a recognizable name - obviously the history that was just commemorated, FCS success, possibly the template for moving up and being successful, some memorable names / moments like Moss, Leftwich in that GMAC bowl.
And having said all that, in fact, the stats you cite show why Marshall would be dilutive to the AAC not additive. Marshall does have a recognizable brand and the reasons they're not the choice to add show why very few WOULD be a good choice to add.

You mention 28k attendance...the 11 AAC football schools averaged 30,285 in 2019. They averaged 30,544 2015-2019. 28k would lower the AAC's average attendance.

You said that 1.89 million viewers for bowl games is pretty dang good.
In 2019, the Gasparilla Bowl vs Marshall was the dead last worst viewed AAC bowl. 2019 AAC bowls averaged 1.97 million viewers without Memphis' Cotton Bowl, 2.57 million with it.
In 2018, the Gasparilla Bowl vs Marshall was the dead last worst viewed AAC bowl. 2018 AAC bowls averaged 2.26 million without UCF's Fiesta Bowl, 3.299 million with the Fiesta.
In 2017 AAC bowls averaged 2.303 million viewers without UCF's Peach Bowl, 3.171 million with the Peach.
In 2016 AAC bowls averaged 2.145 million viewers.
In 2015 UConn's St Petersburg Bowl vs Marshall with 2.4 million viewers was the fourth best viewership of the AAC's eight bowls. Ahead of the 2.166 million viewer average without Houston's Peach Bowl. AAC bowls including the Peach averaged 2.596 million viewers.

Marshall is good for a G4 in a lot of measures, but would be a net negative to add to the AAC. Again, not slamming Marshall or your opinion, but as a case study Marshall is a good example for why so few programs would be a net positive to add.

I agree with herdfan129.

The counter-arguments in response to his post were not very persuasive.

For example:

To use an old expression, "there's not a dime's worth of difference" between the AAC's average attendance of 30,285 and Marshall's reported average attendance against AAC opponents. Although it's true that "28k would lower the AAC's average attendance," it would only lower the AAC's average attendance by a total of 190 fans (.006%) per game.

Marshall's average non-NY6 bowl viewership was only ~15% lower than the average viewership of the AAC's non-NY6 bowls during the same period, and their average bowl viewership of 1,890,000 is nothing to sneeze at.

These minor differences are not nearly substantive enough to exclude a team from a conference.

Far more important is the fact that Marshall's record since the inception of the AAC would place them in the top tier of the AAC.

Marshall is probably the next best FB add for the AAC, after BYU, Army, Air Force, and Boise State. In fact, in terms of the average strength of their program over the past 10 years, Marshall may be #2 after Boise State.

Why? Because the data suggest that, with the exception of UCF and Cincinnati, Boise State and Marshall have been the two non-P5 FB schools that have finished the most seasons in the AP Top 35 since the AAC came into existence in 2013.

Boise State has finished all 7 seasons (2013-2019) in the AP Top 35 (top 25 plus "others receiving votes"). UCF is next on the list with four finishes in the top 35. Marshall (currently #17) and Cincinnati (currently #10) are close behind, having finished in the top 35 three times since 2013 in addition to their current rankings. Air Force (3 top 35 finishes, but currently unranked) Army (2 top 35 finishes) and BYU (0 top 35 finishes) trail behind Marshall, as do Appalachian State (3; currently unranked), San Diego State (3; currently unranked), and 9 of the 11 current AAC teams (Memphis (3, currently unranked), Navy (2), Temple (2), Houston (1), SMU (1), USF (1), Tulsa (1), Tulane (0), & ECU (0)).

.

Marshall would rank as a top tier football member of the AAC, in terms of the number of finishes in the AP top 35 since 2013:

AAC TIER 1 (3+ TOP 35 RANKINGS SINCE 2013):

1 UCF: 4 finishes (#7, #10, #12, #24) in AP Top 35 (not currently ranked)
2 Cincinnati: 3 finishes (#21, #23, #35) in AP Top 35 (currently ranked #7)
3 Memphis: 3 finishes (#17, #24, #25) in AP Top 35 (not currently ranked)
4 Marshall: 3 finishes (#23, #29, #32) in AP Top 35 (currently ranked #17)

AAC TIER 2 (1 OR 2 TOP 35 RANKINGS SINCE 2013):

5 Navy: 2 finishes (#18, #20) in AP Top 35 (not currently ranked)
6 USF: 2 finishes (#19, #21) in AP Top 35 (not currently ranked)
7 Houston: 1 finish (#8) in AP Top 35 (not currently ranked)
8 Tulsa: 1 finish (#34) in AP Top 35 (currently ranked #24)
9 Temple: 2 finishes (#31, #33) in AP Top 35 (not currently ranked)
10 SMU: 1 finish (#33) in AP Top 35 (currently #29)

AAC TIER 3 (1 OR 2 TOP 35 RANKINGS SINCE 2013:

11 Tulane: 0 finishes in AP Top 35
12 ECU: 0 finishes in AP Top 35

.

Moreover, Marshall's 2020 viewership has been very solid. Marshall is one of a handful of non-P5 schools that have had two games with 998,000 or more viewers this season.

Cincinnati, BYU, UCF, Memphis, Navy, Arkansas State, and Houston are the only other non-P5 teams that have had two or more 2+ million-viewer/games.

Thus, Marshall would be a Tier 1 AAC FB program, not only in terms of the number of top 35 teams that they have fielded, but also in terms of the number of their games that have 998,000 or more viewers.

.

There is, thus, no basis in terms of viewership or the success of their football program to support the assertion that: "Marshall ...would be a net negative to add to the AAC."

The notion that replacing the worst FB program in the conference (UConn) with a top tier FB program would be a "net negative" is, at best, difficult to explain from the standpoint of ordinary logic.

To the contrary, Marshall would be a net positive from the standpoint of their FB viewership and the strength of their FB program.

In the words of the robot from Lost in Space, "That does not compute!"