(09-09-2020 01:16 PM)SMUstang Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 11:35 AM)YNot Wrote:  

(09-09-2020 09:51 AM)AztecEmpire Wrote:  One thing that is for sure. AFA's coach has questioned their affiliation with the MW...but that doesn't necessarily mean they will leave and if they do it doesn't mean they join the AAC. I wonder if the solution the AAC adds 1 or 3, not named AFA and Army...and then on top of adding 1 or 3 you extend AFA and Army an affiliated invitation similar to Notre Dame/ACC but for FB only. This would guarantee both academies a minimum number of games (5/6) a season not counting Navy. Considering the poorer quality of academy olys and the long odds to getting them to join as full or partial members, a FB schedule based relationship may be the right fit.

The AAC should have formally affiliated with BYU and Army already. And, actually, nothing would have to really change from the status quo, except that the AAC could promote this affiliation. It's all about branding and perception.

Instead of the ESPN bowl pool - of which BYU and Army already are a part - the AAC could claim that BYU and Army are part of the broader AAC bowl pool, some of which might involve BYU or Army v. AAC matchups. And, the AAC could highlight the various AAC games already on the schedule against BYU and Army as part of the formal affiliation.

So, when BYU plays Navy and Houston this year and Army plays Cincinnati and Tulane (and the various other AAC opponents on future Army and BYU schedules), those games are part of the extended AAC affiliation. It makes these already-scheduled games more meaningful and likely leads to more AAC v. BYU or Army series and helps boost the AAC's prestige and P6 campaign. And, any success by BYU or Army benefits the AAC and vice versa, AAC success benefits BYU and Army, because there is a formal affiliation.

Would this require 5 or 6 AAC teams to give up 1 - 2 OOC games per season? Might work, but would BYU and Army consider it? Seems like BYU might prefer a conference membership.

AAC could offer BYU and Army 4 annual games (similar to Notre Dame and the ACC), 2 home, and 2 away. Then they share bowl games with BYU and Army, and include them in their branding. (not much for the AAC to lose, since schools are already scheduling BYU and ARMY, regardless)

This also gets the AAC a claim of more bowl ties (maybe even getting a 1 quality "western bowl" in Arizona, or Las Vegas). They also get some additional quality matchups for fans and TV. It also creates more of a separation between the MWC and AAC, and pushes the P6 narrative.


Army benefits (being affiliated with Navy, but unwilling to join the AAC as a full member, because they can't compete at that level).

BYU benefits (getting quality games against the AAC).

Seems win-win.