(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:08 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Adding boise is a non starter plain and simple. No room, they don't bring much to the table in terms of location or market (or academics). They aren't increasing our tv revenue enough to cover the portion they'd earn + travel costs of having a team from idaho in a central/east coast league. Plus imagine having to play a game on the smurf turf? major pass.

If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

My guess is that the AAC will have 12 all sports members, 2 Football only and 2 Basketball/Olympics only members when the ink on the new TV deal dries.

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:08 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Adding boise is a non starter plain and simple. No room, they don't bring much to the table in terms of location or market (or academics). They aren't increasing our tv revenue enough to cover the portion they'd earn + travel costs of having a team from idaho in a central/east coast league. Plus imagine having to play a game on the smurf turf? major pass.

If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

good points but I really don't think boise would add $10mil+/year to our contract, and therefore would be eating into any tv contract revenues we'd get. Add to that the issue of having another football only member (would they even want that?) and the problems that come with a 13 team conference they are simply a no.

(06-18-2018 03:24 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:08 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Adding boise is a non starter plain and simple. No room, they don't bring much to the table in terms of location or market (or academics). They aren't increasing our tv revenue enough to cover the portion they'd earn + travel costs of having a team from idaho in a central/east coast league. Plus imagine having to play a game on the smurf turf? major pass.

If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

good points but I really don't think boise would add $10mil+/year to our contract, and therefore would be eating into any tv contract revenues we'd get. Add to that the issue of having another football only member (would they even want that?) and the problems that come with a 13 team conference they are simply a no.

we could add umass as basketball only

(06-18-2018 03:24 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:08 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Adding boise is a non starter plain and simple. No room, they don't bring much to the table in terms of location or market (or academics). They aren't increasing our tv revenue enough to cover the portion they'd earn + travel costs of having a team from idaho in a central/east coast league. Plus imagine having to play a game on the smurf turf? major pass.

If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

good points but I really don't think boise would add $10mil+/year to our contract, and therefore would be eating into any tv contract revenues we'd get. Add to that the issue of having another football only member (would they even want that?) and the problems that come with a 13 team conference they are simply a no.

Boise won't be coming to the AAC. It appears that only one network truly values them and that's ESPN. Now since ESPN didn't help out the MWC on their last contract, I'm guessing that love affair has cooled.

(06-18-2018 03:26 PM)Huskypride Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:24 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

good points but I really don't think boise would add $10mil+/year to our contract, and therefore would be eating into any tv contract revenues we'd get. Add to that the issue of having another football only member (would they even want that?) and the problems that come with a 13 team conference they are simply a no.

we could add umass as basketball only

(06-18-2018 03:26 PM)Huskypride Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:24 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

good points but I really don't think boise would add $10mil+/year to our contract, and therefore would be eating into any tv contract revenues we'd get. Add to that the issue of having another football only member (would they even want that?) and the problems that come with a 13 team conference they are simply a no.

we could add umass as basketball only

I meant we'd have trouble with a 13 team football conference. Unbalanced scheduling, etc.

(06-18-2018 03:30 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:26 PM)Huskypride Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:24 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

good points but I really don't think boise would add $10mil+/year to our contract, and therefore would be eating into any tv contract revenues we'd get. Add to that the issue of having another football only member (would they even want that?) and the problems that come with a 13 team conference they are simply a no.

we could add umass as basketball only

I meant we'd have trouble with a 13 team football conference. Unbalanced scheduling, etc.

If we add basketball only, VCU is the slam dunk for history, similar situations, metro size, school size, location.

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:08 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Adding boise is a non starter plain and simple. No room, they don't bring much to the table in terms of location or market (or academics). They aren't increasing our tv revenue enough to cover the portion they'd earn + travel costs of having a team from idaho in a central/east coast league. Plus imagine having to play a game on the smurf turf? major pass.

If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

Aww isn't that nice of you. What about that travel from New Orleans to Boise every other year? Memphis? Houston? Or the fact that it's at altitude with time zone problems. Or that their recruiting ground is California and the Pacific Northwest?

It was pointed out earlier the hypocracy of the east teams wanting Boise and BYU thanks for confirming it. Tulsa already did the super conference thing. Pass. Especially for nothing to gain.

The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

ECU basketball only. Park our football in the SEC.
UCONN football only. Park their basketball in the ACC.

(06-18-2018 03:51 PM)8BitPirate Wrote:  ECU basketball only. Park our football in the SEC.
UCONN football only. Park their basketball in the ACC.

You, my friend, are really onto something here.

(06-18-2018 03:38 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:21 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:16 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:08 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Adding boise is a non starter plain and simple. No room, they don't bring much to the table in terms of location or market (or academics). They aren't increasing our tv revenue enough to cover the portion they'd earn + travel costs of having a team from idaho in a central/east coast league. Plus imagine having to play a game on the smurf turf? major pass.

If they are football only, there is no real cost increase for travel. Plane tickets for the team are only going to be marginally more expensive to Boise as they would say, Philly. Its not like any of our football teams are taking the bus to other schools.

And they absolutely would give us a little more in TV negotiations...

disagree on all points. Orlando to boise is much more expensive to fly to than orlando to philly. And would they give us a little more in tv negotiations? Maybe marginally more, more likely they'd not give us any more at all. Theres no way to know. If Boise was a slam dunk draw how come the mwc contract sucks?

As far as how much more in travel it would cost... realistically we'd play in Idaho what, once every 4 years? And how much more would that one travel once every 4 years cost realistically? Its marginal in the grand scheme of our TV deal.

And the MWC contract sucks b/c of the rest of the MWC that is zero draw. Thats why Boise State gets 1.8M more than any other conference member. Also, their commissioner sucks but thats a different issue.

Aww isn't that nice of you. What about that travel from New Orleans to Boise every other year? Memphis? Houston? Or the fact that it's at altitude with time zone problems. Or that their recruiting ground is California and the Pacific Northwest?

It was pointed out earlier the hypocracy of the east teams wanting Boise and BYU thanks for confirming it. Tulsa already did the super conference thing. Pass. Especially for nothing to gain.

I was talking to another UCF fan, hence why I was addressing it that way. The point remains unchanged for the west teams. Your plane tickets for 1 game are a little more expensive every other year. That's so minimal in the grand scheme of things man...

(06-18-2018 03:42 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

This guy gets it...

Boise would add $$$ to a TV deal and make our conference a bigger draw... but this aspect is the biggest part. It turns the NY6 essentially into an auto-bid for our conference... and that is worth a ton.

(06-18-2018 03:42 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

no its not, ecu has the same chance whether boise is in the conference or not. Boise isn't going to surrender the bowl so its not changing the chances of any aac team getting the bowl at all. The only thing it does is give the remaining mwc and MAC teams a much easier road to the NY6 bowl than any aac team.

(06-18-2018 04:04 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:42 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

no its not, ecu has the same chance whether boise is in the conference or not. Boise isn't going to surrender the bowl so its not changing the chances of any aac team getting the bowl at all. The only thing it does is give the remaining mwc and MAC teams a much easier road to the NY6 bowl than any aac team.

Huh?

In this scenario, the winner of the AAC will be almost assured to have a higher ranking than any other G4 team... as the perception of SOS will be massively different between our conference and the others... which we know impacts the CFP committee and the pollsters. Right now, if Boise State has a good year they can possibly get it over an AAC team... and our conference doesn't get the game.

If Boise State is in our conference... we no longer have much competition as a conference for the NY6 slot... and make it essentially an auto-bid for our conference champ.

(06-18-2018 04:13 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 04:04 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:42 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

no its not, ecu has the same chance whether boise is in the conference or not. Boise isn't going to surrender the bowl so its not changing the chances of any aac team getting the bowl at all. The only thing it does is give the remaining mwc and MAC teams a much easier road to the NY6 bowl than any aac team.

Huh?

In this scenario, the winner of the AAC will be almost assured to have a higher ranking than any other G4 team... as the perception of SOS will be massively different between our conference and the others... which we know impacts the CFP committee and the pollsters. Right now, if Boise State has a good year they can possibly get it over an AAC team... and our conference doesn't get the game.

If Boise State is in our conference... we no longer have much competition as a conference for the NY6 slot... and make it essentially an auto-bid for our conference champ.

in this scenario, our biggest competitor (boise) would still be our biggest competitor.... just in the conference. So we aren't actually killing off the competition. Additionally, adding a potential power means our champ will most likely have at least 1 loss, usually 2-3 losses. Sorry a 3 loss champ isn't jumping the MWC or MAC or CUSA champ if they are undefeated or have 1 loss. We'd just cannibalize ourselves.

The only way we add boise is if they guaranteed us a NY6 bowl game and took the g4 out of the equation entirely. Unless that happens, its a net loss for AAC.

(06-18-2018 04:04 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:42 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

no its not, ecu has the same chance whether boise is in the conference or not. Boise istn't going to surrender the bowl so its not changing the chances of any aac team getting the bowl at all. The only thing it does is give the remaining mwc and MAC teams a much easier road to the NY6 bowl than any aac team.

Boise is as much of a threat as central Michigan. They've gotten the ny6 as many times.

Meanwhile that undefeated central Michigan was fighting a three loss navy for that spot.

Boise is not a threat, the mwc isn't either. Did you not read the round table discussion of their own biased media guys?

For a handful of reasons this competition is over.

AAC has multiple teams doing as well as Boise in ratings and ny6.

The AAC has bigger metros.

The AAC has better recruiting grounds for all sports and multiple fertile grounds for basketball and football.

We already make more money then they do and that won't be changing.

Rivalries are growing. The west has been a shoot out and knock down division. The east has held it's own and is anchored by the way on I-4. It has the potential to become as tough a fight as the west has been if Temple and Cincy continue to work back up. ECU returning to form would be a huge bonus.

(06-18-2018 04:20 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 04:04 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:42 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

no its not, ecu has the same chance whether boise is in the conference or not. Boise istn't going to surrender the bowl so its not changing the chances of any aac team getting the bowl at all. The only thing it does is give the remaining mwc and MAC teams a much easier road to the NY6 bowl than any aac team.

Boise is as much of a threat as central Michigan. They've gotten the ny6 as many times.

Meanwhile that undefeated central Michigan was fighting a three loss navy for that spot.

Boise is not a threat, the mwc isn't either. Did you not read the round table discussion of their own biased media guys?

For a handful of reasons this competition is over.

AAC has multiple teams doing as well as Boise in ratings and ny6.

The AAC has bigger metros.

The AAC has better recruiting grounds for all sports and multiple fertile grounds for basketball and football.

We already make more money then they do and that won't be changing.

Rivalries are growing. The west has been a shoot out and knock down division. The east has held it's own and is anchored by the way on I-4. It has the potential to become as tough a fight as the west has been if Temple and Cincy continue to work back up. ECU returning to form would be a huge bonus.

yup. we've already won the competition. Boise is in the review and so is mwc.

(06-18-2018 04:23 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 04:20 PM)TU4ever Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 04:04 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-18-2018 03:42 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  The draw of taking Boise from the MWC isn't so much the $$ they'd add, it's killing off our competition for the New Year's contract bowl.

no its not, ecu has the same chance whether boise is in the conference or not. Boise istn't going to surrender the bowl so its not changing the chances of any aac team getting the bowl at all. The only thing it does is give the remaining mwc and MAC teams a much easier road to the NY6 bowl than any aac team.

Boise is as much of a threat as central Michigan. They've gotten the ny6 as many times.

Meanwhile that undefeated central Michigan was fighting a three loss navy for that spot.

Boise is not a threat, the mwc isn't either. Did you not read the round table discussion of their own biased media guys?

For a handful of reasons this competition is over.

AAC has multiple teams doing as well as Boise in ratings and ny6.

The AAC has bigger metros.

The AAC has better recruiting grounds for all sports and multiple fertile grounds for basketball and football.

We already make more money then they do and that won't be changing.

Rivalries are growing. The west has been a shoot out and knock down division. The east has held it's own and is anchored by the way on I-4. It has the potential to become as tough a fight as the west has been if Temple and Cincy continue to work back up. ECU returning to form would be a huge bonus.

yup. we've already won the competition. Boise is in the review and so is mwc.

As long as the schools stay committed to playing top level then yup we'll watch as they fall further and further behind. Several MWC teams appear to be just along for the ride. Every AAC school is trying to compete in every sport, now with Lebo gone there's no doubt. This is a conference exclusively made up of hungry predators.