I’ve always been pro Army and BYU for football only. Then having VCU and Dayton for all sports.

Then if we have to go to 16 at some point take Air Force and Boise State. Currently I think BYU and Army adds soon with VCU and Dayton would give a big boost in money on the next round. A lot of good inventory for CBS/ESPN for football and basketball. The plus is all four have great fan bases and always have a good home crowd for football/basketball which we need.

B/c they're not needed

BYU isn’t coming. So, if you add Army—you play with 11 or you have to figure out a #12. Air Force would be my first phone call if Army was interested.

They were added to Conference USA a while back and they couldn't compete

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(12-09-2017 06:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  BYU isn’t coming. So, if you add Army—you play with 11 or you have to figure out a #12. Air Force would be my first phone call if Army was interested.

You mean 3 and #14. . .

Hype it would be great having both Army and Navy in the same conference

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(12-09-2017 06:20 PM)Stookey57 Wrote:  Hype it would be great having both Army and Navy in the same conference

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

We need to add BC and CCSU before Army.

(12-09-2017 06:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  BYU isn’t coming. So, if you add Army—you play with 11 or you have to figure out a #12. Air Force would be my first phone call if Army was interested.

I know BYU would help this league in many ways but I've pretty much given up on that program joining the AAC... And that's okay b/c the equity this league has created its been done with current membership.

Army in terms of football strength they just don't move the needle enough.

Having said that, I hope the AAC does not make a foolish move just for the sake of adding one other football member.

You won't be able to add Army without moving the game to an earlier date. Unless the AAC wants to play the CCG the week after the Army/Navy game. Having them as a conference game gives too many complications and implications for the AAC CCG.

You could try for Air Force and they might want to now.

(12-09-2017 06:37 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  You won't be able to add Army without moving the game to an earlier date. Unless the AAC wants to play the CCG the week after the Army/Navy game. Having them as a conference game gives too many complications and implications for the AAC CCG.

You could try for Air Force and they might want to now.

Nah, the Army Navy game has more power than any jealous G4 commish who complains Out of self interest.

(12-09-2017 03:35 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  Watching Army Navy game. Why have we not added Army yet? How about Air Force. Add them both and then use their leverage to pressure The powers to include AAC as power conference. Thoughts?

Stop it

Army might come if they continue their success because no one wants to play a successful triple option team late in the conference schedule.

Next year they have Liberty in September and Colgate & Lafayette in November.

They also must consistently find a special QB. When Navy has a great non injured QB we win. When we have uncertainty like this year we lose.

Army's Bradshaw is graduating. Can they find a second successful QB? Probably, their schedule next year except for OK, is horrible. It is almost like their whole schedule is just a warm up for Army / Navy now.

(12-09-2017 07:21 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 06:37 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  You won't be able to add Army without moving the game to an earlier date. Unless the AAC wants to play the CCG the week after the Army/Navy game. Having them as a conference game gives too many complications and implications for the AAC CCG.

You could try for Air Force and they might want to now.

Nah, the Army Navy game has more power than any jealous G4 commish who complains Out of self interest.

You're not getting it. If the Army - Navy game is a conference game with division implications on who plays in the CCG you are playing your CCG next week instead of when all other CCG games are played. Army/Navy has to move to a different date. Which is why Air Force is the choice because the game can be kept on the same date.

(12-09-2017 06:37 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  You won't be able to add Army without moving the game to an earlier date. Unless the AAC wants to play the CCG the week after the Army/Navy game. Having them as a conference game gives too many complications and implications for the AAC CCG.

You could try for Air Force and they might want to now.

Play it on Veterans day weekend or that Monday since state and federal governments are closed that day. Play it that Monday afternoon it could be the lead in for Monday night football.

(12-09-2017 04:30 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 04:28 PM)Hurricane Drummer Wrote:  If adding Army will get us 10 million TV dollars per team each year then I say, welcome brethren.

If we get any raise by adding them, we should do it.

They have to agree to come...so far they have said no thanks, we can't just add them

(12-09-2017 07:39 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 07:21 PM)baruna falls Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 06:37 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  You won't be able to add Army without moving the game to an earlier date. Unless the AAC wants to play the CCG the week after the Army/Navy game. Having them as a conference game gives too many complications and implications for the AAC CCG.

You could try for Air Force and they might want to now.

Nah, the Army Navy game has more power than any jealous G4 commish who complains Out of self interest.

You're not getting it. If the Army - Navy game is a conference game with division implications on who plays in the CCG you are playing your CCG next week instead of when all other CCG games are played. Army/Navy has to move to a different date. Which is why Air Force is the choice because the game can be kept on the same date.

Nope. Army and Navy would be in different divisions and would only play each other as an OOc game. Otherwise you destroy a lot of the Army-Navy game’s value by pushing it off its tradition weekend. In other words Army and Navy would play a full 8 game conference schedule PLUS the Army-Navy game (played the week after championship Saturday). Army and Navy would never meet in conference play.

(12-09-2017 05:53 PM)Westhoff123 Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 05:53 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 04:20 PM)WhyIsTheRumGone Wrote:  As an ECU fan, I couldn't not imagine having to endure being trounced by 3 triple option teams every year. Navy is enough.

Who is the third?

Tulane.


Sent from my Necronomicon using DemonTalk

I always laugh at the idea that Tulane is a triple option team. What “triple option team” throws the ball 31 times a game like we did at SMU? Now, we do run some plays that include some option pitches, and we do run a lot of plays that include some read option “mesh” action from the QB. But to call it a triple option like Army or even Navy is kind of silly.

(12-09-2017 10:12 PM)OUGwave Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 05:53 PM)Westhoff123 Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 05:53 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 04:20 PM)WhyIsTheRumGone Wrote:  As an ECU fan, I couldn't not imagine having to endure being trounced by 3 triple option teams every year. Navy is enough.

Who is the third?

Tulane.


Sent from my Necronomicon using DemonTalk

I always laugh at the idea that Tulane is a triple option team. What “triple option team” throws the ball 31 times a game like we did at SMU? Now, we do run some plays that include some option pitches, and we do run a lot of plays that include some read option “mesh” action from the QB. But to call it a triple option like Army or even Navy is kind of silly.

Your just a hater.


Sent from my Necronomicon using DemonTalk

(12-09-2017 04:16 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  We're holding out for the Marines.

Great idea. Let's get the Marine Academy.

(12-09-2017 05:56 PM)HuskyU Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 05:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  It was also their only time, they enjoy their independence.

Having a sub-par first time doesn't mean you should be abstinent for the rest of your life.

XOXO

Yeah, well they were wearing protection the first time. I guess they should take it off the top to enjoy the sensation better next time. Leather tops for sure.