(08-06-2015 08:17 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 07:31 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(08-05-2015 12:13 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  CUSA'ers will tout this into their grave. For god's sake man, everyone other than CUSA message board posters view AAC & MWC as top 2 G5's and above CUSA.

MAC fan here. I don't view AAC & MWC as top 2 G5's.

.

Lol! Thanks for that input. Of course there are some that still believe the moon landing was just a Hollywood production. I would point out that teams don't go from the AAC into CUSA but rather from CUSA into the AAC. I wonder why that is. In any event everyone is entitled to their respective opinions.

I would point out that teams used to go from CUSA to the Big East.

No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

That said- don't get me wrong -UCF deserves to be in a Power conference again.
Heck, they deserve at the very least to be in a top two G5 conference. Maybe the AAC will play better this year and they'll return to that level. :)

(08-06-2015 09:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I would point out that teams used to go from CUSA to the Big East.

No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

Ehhh...............


12/16/2012
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...-framework

3/26/2013
http://www.csnphilly.com/ncaa/report-tul...d-big-east

Granted we didn't have the "name" AAC but the cards were more than on the table for Tulsa and they knew they weren't joining a BCS conference.

I would argue the same for ECU but I digress......

Just because we didn't have the name doesn't mean at least Tulsa (and I argue ECU) chose to leave CUSA knowing it wasn't going to be an automatic qualifier.

(08-06-2015 09:28 AM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 09:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I would point out that teams used to go from CUSA to the Big East.

No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

Ehhh...............


12/16/2012
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...-framework

3/26/2013
http://www.csnphilly.com/ncaa/report-tul...d-big-east

Granted we didn't have the "name" AAC but the cards were more than on the table for Tulsa and they knew they weren't joining a BCS conference.

I would argue the same for ECU but I digress......

Just because we didn't have the name doesn't mean at least Tulsa (and I argue ECU) chose to leave CUSA knowing it wasn't going to be an automatic qualifier.

How can you argue for ECU and not Tulane? We were invited on the same day.

(08-06-2015 09:29 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 09:28 AM)GO Coogs GO!!! Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 09:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  I would point out that teams used to go from CUSA to the Big East.

No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

Ehhh...............


12/16/2012
http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...-framework

3/26/2013
http://www.csnphilly.com/ncaa/report-tul...d-big-east

Granted we didn't have the "name" AAC but the cards were more than on the table for Tulsa and they knew they weren't joining a BCS conference.

I would argue the same for ECU but I digress......

Just because we didn't have the name doesn't mean at least Tulsa (and I argue ECU) chose to leave CUSA knowing it wasn't going to be an automatic qualifier.

How can you argue for ECU and not Tulane? We were invited on the same day.

A quick search only pulled up Tulsa being invited after the purge was announced.

I really didn't feel the need to dig much deeper having already debunked his stance.

(08-06-2015 09:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 08:17 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 07:31 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(08-05-2015 12:13 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  CUSA'ers will tout this into their grave. For god's sake man, everyone other than CUSA message board posters view AAC & MWC as top 2 G5's and above CUSA.

MAC fan here. I don't view AAC & MWC as top 2 G5's.

.

Lol! Thanks for that input. Of course there are some that still believe the moon landing was just a Hollywood production. I would point out that teams don't go from the AAC into CUSA but rather from CUSA into the AAC. I wonder why that is. In any event everyone is entitled to their respective opinions.

I would point out that teams used to go from CUSA to the Big East.

No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

That said- don't get me wrong -UCF deserves to be in a CONTRACT conference again. (FIFY)
Heck, they deserve at the very least to be in a top two G5 conference. Maybe the AAC will play better this year and they'll return to that level. :)

Technically you might be correct. But that is merely elevating form over substance. The teams referenced left CUSA to join a conference that included the teams currently known as the AAC, formally known as the Big East. I presume you understand the underlying rationale. In any event no team has or is likely to go from the Big East or AAC to CUSA. If the Big 12 expands by taking Two AAC teams and the AAC invites two teams from CUSA to join, what do you suppose the two CUSA teams would do? You and I both know the answer to that question. Hence my point. Further if Rice is asked to join the AAC today, what do you believe their answer would be?

(08-06-2015 09:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

A purely semantic argument. Several schools announced departures from CUSA to join what was substantially the same as the AAC.

(08-06-2015 09:44 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 09:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

A purely semantic argument. Several schools announced departures from CUSA to join what was substantially the same as the AAC.

Actually I see it as: Several schools announced departures from CUSA to join what was substantially the same as the CUSA.

(08-06-2015 09:41 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 09:19 AM)owl at the moon Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 08:17 AM)NestaKnight1 Wrote:  

(08-06-2015 07:31 AM)Miami (Oh) Yeah ! Wrote:  

(08-05-2015 12:13 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  CUSA'ers will tout this into their grave. For god's sake man, everyone other than CUSA message board posters view AAC & MWC as top 2 G5's and above CUSA.

MAC fan here. I don't view AAC & MWC as top 2 G5's.

.

Lol! Thanks for that input. Of course there are some that still believe the moon landing was just a Hollywood production. I would point out that teams don't go from the AAC into CUSA but rather from CUSA into the AAC. I wonder why that is. In any event everyone is entitled to their respective opinions.

I would point out that teams used to go from CUSA to the Big East.

No school has ever announced a departure (from any conference) to something called the "AAC".

That said- don't get me wrong -UCF deserves to be in a CONTRACT conference again. (FIFY)
Heck, they deserve at the very least to be in a top two G5 conference. Maybe the AAC will play better this year and they'll return to that level. :)

Technically you might be correct. But that is merely elevating form over substance. The teams referenced left CUSA to join a conference that included the teams currently known as the AAC, formally known as the Big East. I presume you understand the underlying rationale. In any event no team has or is likely to go from the Big East or AAC to CUSA. If the Big 12 expands by taking Two AAC teams and the AAC invites two teams from CUSA to join, what do you suppose the two CUSA teams would do? You and I both know the answer to that question. Hence my point. Further if Rice is asked to join the AAC today, what do you believe their answer would be?

I don't think it's merely semantics - The Big East(AAC) was an autobid conference when every school accepted/announced their invite.

I certainly agree that an AAC->CUSA transfer is very unlikely. AAC now seems fairly well constituted with no true outliers. (Other than UCF and a couple others as strong P5 expansion candidates)

And true, some in CUSA would gladly switch to AAC for various reasons. But no, today, I genuinely feel that Rice (as well as perhaps some others in CUSA) would consider, but decline, an overture from the AAC.

AAC schools definitely have larger athletic budgets and it will be interesting to me to see if that translates to some overall football success this fall compared to the MWC and CUSA.

Rice a solid "no" to move to the AAC?

I find that hard to believe with all the other private schools having made their way from CUSA to the AAC.

I suppose if there was a quick strike by the B12 for Houston and Cincinnati from the AAC with SMU/Tulsa heading MWC there wouldn't be a reason for Rice to get involved with the AAC.

Tulsa I know was on the fence about going to the AAC and almost didn't do it.

Schools were joining because they thought that West Virginia, Louisville, Rutgers, Pittsburgh and Syracuse would be staying. AAC would still be a P6 conference if those schools did not leave. TCU, Boise State and San Diego State would be part of it.

(08-08-2015 02:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Rice a solid "no" to move to the AAC?

I find that hard to believe with all the other private schools having made their way from CUSA to the AAC.

I suppose if there was a quick strike by the B12 for Houston and Cincinnati from the AAC with SMU/Tulsa heading MWC there wouldn't be a reason for Rice to get involved with the AAC.

Tulsa I know was on the fence about going to the AAC and almost didn't do it.

"Solid no" is too strong a term. Everyone keeps their options open in realignment.
I just don't see Rice to AAC as beneficial enough to either party to make it worth the effort right now.

ehh, who cares?????

I have no idea how any of these teams would do? Nobody has played a single game yet. College football fans are SUPER WEIRD.

(08-05-2015 12:07 PM)YNot Wrote:  

(08-05-2015 12:02 PM)jskwrite Wrote:  2. List of teams in power conferences that would not win the AAC or Mountain West:
BC
Syracuse
Wake
Pitt
Iowa State
Kansas
Texas Tech
Rutgers
Indiana
Illinois
Iowa
Purdue
Washington State
Colorado
Oregon State
Vanderbilt

Thoughts on either topic ?

IMO, you underestimate BC, Pitt, Tech, and Oregon St. Any of those teams would at least be in contention for the AAC or MWC titles.

agree

(08-08-2015 02:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Rice a solid "no" to move to the AAC?

I find that hard to believe with all the other private schools having made their way from CUSA to the AAC.

And there is the dilemma. Yes to like minded institutions but ouch to four small fan bases in the same conference. Hasn't worked before (SWC, WAC-16, C-USA), so why would it work now? There's no denying the large number of UTEP, UTSA, North Texas and Louisiana Tech fans who follow their teams to Rice.

That did not happen with Tulsa, SMU, and, to a lesser extent, Tulane.

(08-05-2015 08:56 PM)ECUPirated Wrote:  Please for the love of God, stop contributing to the delinquency / idiocy of the media and the contract conferences by agreeing with them that the "other" five conferences not named ACC, SEC, PAC, B1G, and B12 are less important to college football and therefore should be referred to by using the letter "G" placed directly beside the number "5". It's bad enough for them to use that stupid crap, but it's even worse when fans of those "other" conferences accept and use it as well.

This has been a Public Service Announcement for fans of teams from noncontract conferences.

Good point.