(11-27-2020 09:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 08:55 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 08:32 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(11-27-2020 08:10 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

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

You said--"These minor differences are not important enough to exclude a team from a conference."

What you seem to be missing is--the reasons cited also don't constitute a reason for conference members to take a pay cut in order to add a new member that actually slightly weakens the conference.

If your talking about adding a member that likely increases the long term value of the conference like BYU, Boise, or Army----it makes some sense to accept a small pay cut NOW in order to create a better product that will result in bigger dollars down the line. It makes no sense to take a small pay cut now in order to add a member that is unlikely to provide any future improvement in conference value (over and above the current value).

Question: Why would the conference have to take a pay cut?

With a 12-year broadcasting agreement, and the fact that the amount that ESPN had set aside for UConn would be more than enough to allocate for a school such as Marshall, it's not clear why there would be a pay cut.

I suppose one could try to argue that Marshall FB won't generate the income that UConn FB would have generated for ESPN, but that argument would tend to be unsupported by the fact that Marshall has already had two of the highest viewership games among all non-P5 teams this season.

If I were an ESPN executive, I'd be looking at those numbers and thinking:

"You're darn tootin' that we'd like Marshall to become an AAC FB member! It'll generate far more revenue for ESPN than UConn FB would have done!"

Well, we take a pay cut because the AAC income is more than the just the TV deal. Right now our share of the CFP/Bowl/NCAA Tournament revenue is cut 11 ways rather than 12. Im not sure, but I dont think our TV deal was even cut by the same amount as a full UConn share would have represented--so we are actually making a bit over 7 million each on the TV deal. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that adding Marshall would be seen as ESPN as being worth the entire amount we lost when UConn left. Keep in mind, ESPN already has the rights to some Marshall games if they want. In fact, if ESPN was truly of the "You're darn tootin' that we'd like Marshall" mindset----then they would have laid out the whopping 4 million or so it would have cost to buy ALL of CUSA (including all 8 Marshall conference games) rather than pay the AAC an extra 7 million to add Marshall.

Look, if the world were going to come to an end if the AAC didnt add a team---adding Marshall would NOT suddenly doom the league to drift aimlessly at the bottom of the G5. The league would carry on roughly the same manner as its current version---but thats not the point. The point is adding a team that looks like the bottom or middle of the league means we'd have missed a huge opportunity to substantially improve the quality and perception of the league. So, barring "the world is ending" scenario---there is currently no convincing reason for the AAC add a team that would not clearly and substantially increase the leagues value. Instead, we can keep our powder dry---while earning a bit more money---and bide our time until we have an opportunity to add a school that truly adds to the quality, perception, and media value of the AAC.

It's a sad reality, but it's the same argument for us joining the Big 12. The reason all of us want it so bad is because it benefits us and us only. We would be another mouth to feed to them. The only way any of us will ever be a P5 team is if we develop into that league. Cincy making the playoff would help a great deal in that respect