(06-13-2021 02:28 AM)JamesTKirk Wrote:  

(06-12-2021 04:48 PM)esayem Wrote:  No G5 program is going to stake their future on the possibility they can get in the playoffs with losses.

That's a classic example of an overly-simplified "straw man" argument.

Definition of straw man:

"a weak or imaginary opposition (such as an argument or adversary) set up only to be easily confuted". https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/straw%20man

No one suggested that BYU or the MWC schools would be staking (i.e., risking) their entire future to join the AAC simply because doing so would enable them to "get into the playoffs despite having losses."

That would be an extremely weak justification for making such a move!

After all, by virtue of being members of a FBS conference, the MWC schools would have the same opportunity that the AAC schools would have to make the playoffs, either as highly-ranked at-large team or as one of the six most highly-ranked conference champions in the nation.

Thus, the 12-team college football playoff proposal, if passed, wouldn't be a sufficient motivating factor for any MWC team to leave, in and of itself.

There would have to be other significant benefits to justify switching conferences.

Would there be any other significant benefits?

There might be. Some of the benefits might include:

1) Due in part to being located in a much more densely part of the nation, the AAC's viewership has been much greater than that of the other G5 conferences, and its future growth potential also appears to be much greater.

2) The AAC has put much more effort into making progress toward obtaining formal NCAA autonomous status than have the other G5 conferences.

3) The addition of a powerhouse football or football/basketball school such as Boise, BYU, or SDSU would be likely to boost the AAC's viewership, and thus, its long-term revenue-generating potential considerably. The effects would be evident within one year, and would be likely to increase, perhaps geometrically, from then on.

4) The addition of two or three powerhouse FB or FB/BB schools could have far more potential to increase the conference's viewership and revenue-generating potential , making it possible for the AAC schools to negotiate for $12 to $15 million per year in the 2030s, as compared with the $7 million that they are scheduled to receive in the 2020s.

5) The AAC is the only conference that has a clearly articulated strategic plan to become an autonomous power conference.

6) Every non-P5 FBS university would find it highly advantageous to become a power school, and there is a long list of schools, including some MWC schools that appear to have expressed interest in joining the American.

Those are the main reasons why some western schools would "stake their futures" on joining a conference located in the Central and Eastern time zones.

The fact that the AAC has had the most success of all the G5 conferences in placing teams in the NY6 bowls, and thus appears to be the most likely to place teams in the 12-team College Football Playoffs is just a secondary reason why some of the MWC schools, such as Boise State, might think of joining the American.

In the case of Boise State, their interest in joining the American appears to be driven, largely, by the fact that they have tried unsuccessfully to make it into the NY6 bowls since 2014, due in part to playing a slightly less rigorous schedule. However, they may also find the prospect of joining the AAC in hope of helping to propel it to power conference status to be equally alluring.

.

BYU, is a somewhat different case. Factors 1-6, itemized above, haven't appeared to drive quite as much interest in the American as some of the MWC schools have shown.

The CFP expansion proposal might be a more important consideration for BYU than it it is for the MWC schools, because unlike the MWC schools, BYU isn't currently in a conference, and thus would only have one potential pathway into the CFP playoffs - - by earning an at-large bid.

BYU has remained dead-set on the idea of getting to the football equivalent of valhalla by playing and defeating a slew of P5 opponents, and they haven't changed their minds yet. However, they have lost far more P5 games than they have won since they departed the MWC, and they failed to finish in the top 30 even once throughout the decade that they pursued that strategy.

BYU will play 7 P5 teams this year. If they win enough games to finish in the top 15 or 20 in 2021, that might encourage them enough to keep plugging away at their strategy for another decade. But if they finish outside the top 30 again in 2021 and 2022, as they've done so many times before, they might start to reconsider their options.

The first 12-team playoffs could begin within the next 3 to 5 years, if approved. If BYU's "play a P5 schedule" strategy continues to get them nowhere, and if they become completely irrelevant in the excitement about the college football playoffs, finding themselves on the outside looking in, they might decide to ditch the "P5 schedule" and go back to what worked for them before by joining a conference, figuring that doing so would probably double their chances of at least being viewed as a CFP "bubble" team more years than not in the closing weeks of each football season.

Would that mean that they would necessarily begin to show interest in joining the American? Maybe, maybe not. They could simply return to the MWC, since they had success there.

However, the MWC isn't the conference that it was when Utah, TCU, and BYU were members, and BYU might decide that, if joining a conference is by far the best way to go - - if they really want to become a relevant part of the college playoff discussions, they should join the strongest G5 conference, with the greatest chance of becoming an autonomous power conference.

.

No no no. There is a difference between being oversimplified and concise. I am concise. I can summarize my argument in a few sentences or less. You obviously cannot.

Your original argument was centered around BYU having a more accessible path to the playoff via an AAC schedule. Newsflash: this past season BYU would have been in contention with an incredibly weak schedule featuring zero P5 teams. As you know, that is not the case in a normal season.

You keep mentioning extremely recent history when it comes to hypothetical expanded playoff participants. Okay, so in recent history which schedule has the committee favored: a schedule full of P5 teams or an AAC schedule?

BYU wants to be a national program playing P5 opponents. The AAC does not provide that. Bruce is correct, they don’t want to be perceived lower than Utah. Which is why they left a G5 conference in the first place!

So if your argument is BYU should give up playing P5 teams and join the AAC because they just can’t hack it. Well, that’ll just have to be a “wait and see”. I can’t imagine a program like BYU falling on their sword. They have their own network, they’re in a good spot for Olympic sports, and quite frankly their own self perception won’t allow them to. Plus, all signs point to them being content where they are. I’d like you to prove otherwise because I just can’t find anything from their end pointing towards interest in the AAC.