(07-26-2018 05:18 PM)vick mike Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:05 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

Kicking out Temple are you? For Boise and SDSU? Nice.

Sorry, you’re right. Did that quick at work. Replace ECU with Temple...

(07-26-2018 06:31 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  Written by the MWC site...

https://www.mwcconnection.com/2018/7/25/...conference





(Spoiler: AAC in a landslide)

A little scratching of the surface and things look a little strange. For example:

Quote:For the sake of simplicity, we will define “top teams” as the top four record wise each season. In the Mountain West, there 4 year total for their top 4 teams combined is 156-59, good for a winning percentage of 72.56%. The American’s 4 year total of their top 4 teams record wise comes out to 119-37, resulting in a 76.28% winning percentage. Though it is close, the American takes this one.

This is already set up for bias (do you define the best 4 teams as having the best overall record, or having the four best conference records, not to mention not taking into account difficulty of schedule, etc.), but how exactly do they compute the AAC's four best teams over four years as having a 119-37 record? That's a total of 156 games, which means 39 games a season, which is less than 10 games per team.

Here's a simple statistic - let's look at the final AP rankings for each of the four seasons. If you look at top 10 finishes, the AAC has two (#8 Houston in 2015, #6 UCF in 2017). The MWC has... zero. If you go with top 25 AP finishes, the AAC has 7 (in addition to the two top 10 finishes, we have #21 USF and #25 Memphis in 2017, #19 USF in 2016, #18 Navy in 2016 and #25 Memphis in 2016). The MWC has managed a total of 3 (#22 Boise State in 2017, #25 SDSU in 2016 and #16 Boise State in 2014). So in those 4 years, five different AAC schools have finished a season ranked (shows we're not a one trick pony) while the only non-Boise finish was SDSU's #25 finish in 2016.

Another is to look at the final Sagarin rankings by conference for each of the last 4 seasons. For the last four seasons, the averages are:

2017 AAC = 66.26, MWC = 61.88
2016 AAC = 66.68, MWC = 62.10
2015 AAC = 66.88, MWC = 61.74
2014 AAC = 60.88, MWC = 62.16 (note, Navy wasn't in the AAC this year, including them would have lifted us above the MWC again)

That 4-5 point difference is close to the difference between the AAC and the lowest P5 team. This hasn't been a contest at all...

USFFan

(07-26-2018 06:22 PM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 05:18 PM)vick mike Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:05 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Poseidon Wrote:  RAID The MWC. Our tv deal would improve if the AAC looked like this...

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, Tulsa, Navy(travel for free*), Colorado State or Fresno State.

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, Temple, Tulane, Cincy

I think Automatic NY6 bowl would be doable at that point.

I think 16 mouths is too many to feed to where the increase in TV deal starts to see diminishing returns. I think this conference would really create some $$$ per school and push hard for the P6 legitimacy:

WEST of Mississippi: Boise St., BYU, SDSU, Houston, SMU, and Navy

EAST or Mississippi: UCF, USF, ECU, UCONN, Memphis, and Cincy

That would be a heck of a 12 team conference that could command some $$$... but we'd be leaving a lot of current members by the waste side to do that.

Kicking out Temple are you? For Boise and SDSU? Nice.

Sorry, you’re right. Did that quick at work. Replace ECU with Temple...

(07-26-2018 01:23 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 12:50 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Every few years yes but after a short while they'd fall into the middle of the pack without the financial advantage they enjoy over the rest of the MWC now and a step up in competition at the top.

Their recruiting might improve though, especially from texas kids so maybe not. I think overall they would be 2nd tier in AAC, generally.

If you think they would be 2nd tier you are on something. They have a better brand name than anyone in the AAC. They recruit everywhere and being in the AAC would only enhance them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I take exception to several of your assertions. Houston's got a better brand than Boise. The run and shoot > the Statue of Liberty, Andre Ware's Heisman > dead birds flying into blue turf, the Cougar getting teabagged by the Oregon Duck > Legarrette Blount beating up the Boise State trash talker... the list goes on and on. Seriously, every year that goes by, that Fiesta Bowl win over Oklahoma fades more and more.

And as for the "recruit everywhere" line, have you looked at their roster? They have 3 players from east of the Mississippi. They essentially recruit California and Texas, which is completely logical, but hardly any wider than what the rest of their MWC brethren do. And Rivals has their last 4 recruiting classes ranked as the #55, #66, #54 and #64 classes (an AAC team beats them every season). Hardly the mark of a brand that's recruiting everywhere.

Look, Boise's done very well, but it's not clear that Chris Petersen didn't take what was left of their magic with him when he left. It will be interesting to see if they keep their "most favored nation" status in the MWC now that they've kind of come back to Earth a bit.

USFFan

(07-26-2018 10:19 AM)Mestophalies Wrote:  I think Boise State would belong in the American Conference if they could just do three things.

1, Get rid of that awful Blue Field.
2, Get their academics above a community college level.
3, Relocate to New York City.

That blue field is hideous and with their blue uniforms it's like wearing full camo gear.

But BSU has 2 elite wins in the past 5 years per this article.

Meanwhile "flash in the pan" UH has 5.5 of them, 7th in the nation. UCF is right behind UH with 5

This conversation will be interesting come December 2018.

(07-26-2018 06:56 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 01:23 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 12:50 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Every few years yes but after a short while they'd fall into the middle of the pack without the financial advantage they enjoy over the rest of the MWC now and a step up in competition at the top.

Their recruiting might improve though, especially from texas kids so maybe not. I think overall they would be 2nd tier in AAC, generally.

If you think they would be 2nd tier you are on something. They have a better brand name than anyone in the AAC. They recruit everywhere and being in the AAC would only enhance them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I take exception to several of your assertions. Houston's got a better brand than Boise. The run and shoot > the Statue of Liberty, Andre Ware's Heisman > dead birds flying into blue turf, the Cougar getting teabagged by the Oregon Duck > Legarrette Blount beating up the Boise State trash talker... the list goes on and on. Seriously, every year that goes by, that Fiesta Bowl win over Oklahoma fades more and more.

And as for the "recruit everywhere" line, have you looked at their roster? They have 3 players from east of the Mississippi. They essentially recruit California and Texas, which is completely logical, but hardly any wider than what the rest of their MWC brethren do. And Rivals has their last 4 recruiting classes ranked as the #55, #66, #54 and #64 classes (an AAC team beats them every season). Hardly the mark of a brand that's recruiting everywhere.

Look, Boise's done very well, but it's not clear that Chris Petersen didn't take what was left of their magic with him when he left. It will be interesting to see if they keep their "most favored nation" status in the MWC now that they've kind of come back to Earth a bit.

USFFan

Boise will keep thier “most favored nation” status because it’s written into thier membership agreement. It’s permanent—-and the MW’s other members are stuck with it forever.

(07-27-2018 03:58 AM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  This conversation will be interesting come December 2018.

True, BSU should throw themselves now with the AAC before their November implosion....

(07-27-2018 08:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 06:56 PM)usffan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 01:23 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 12:50 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Every few years yes but after a short while they'd fall into the middle of the pack without the financial advantage they enjoy over the rest of the MWC now and a step up in competition at the top.

Their recruiting might improve though, especially from texas kids so maybe not. I think overall they would be 2nd tier in AAC, generally.

If you think they would be 2nd tier you are on something. They have a better brand name than anyone in the AAC. They recruit everywhere and being in the AAC would only enhance them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I take exception to several of your assertions. Houston's got a better brand than Boise. The run and shoot > the Statue of Liberty, Andre Ware's Heisman > dead birds flying into blue turf, the Cougar getting teabagged by the Oregon Duck > Legarrette Blount beating up the Boise State trash talker... the list goes on and on. Seriously, every year that goes by, that Fiesta Bowl win over Oklahoma fades more and more.

And as for the "recruit everywhere" line, have you looked at their roster? They have 3 players from east of the Mississippi. They essentially recruit California and Texas, which is completely logical, but hardly any wider than what the rest of their MWC brethren do. And Rivals has their last 4 recruiting classes ranked as the #55, #66, #54 and #64 classes (an AAC team beats them every season). Hardly the mark of a brand that's recruiting everywhere.

Look, Boise's done very well, but it's not clear that Chris Petersen didn't take what was left of their magic with him when he left. It will be interesting to see if they keep their "most favored nation" status in the MWC now that they've kind of come back to Earth a bit.

USFFan

Boise will keep thier “most favored nation” status because it’s written into thier membership agreement. It’s permanent—-and the MW’s other members are stuck with it forever.

boise rights are negotiated separately but there was an article before last season that said other members are questioning if boise should get so much more (they make 2.8M rest of league makes a paltry 1.1M) given they aren't bcs busters anymore. Boise said they were open to discussions about a more even revenue distribution. But that was 2017 and nothing has been done yet, so I guess we'll see what happens.

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 09:39 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  We really are though.

TV Contract (media perception) were way ahead of MWC and its going to be even bigger come 2019. Rankings (media/fan perception) were way ahead. Budgets? way ahead. Attendance? way ahead.

Thats football. Now look at basketball and it gets ridiculously wider. We're consensus right in the middle already. No one thinks MWC is a better conference than AAC. If you can find an expert that does please link. Adding boise isn't going to suddenly convince anyone we are P5 caliber and isn't going to mix up the conference perception rankings any.

We'll be thought of as the 6th best conference just like we are today, only have less money and a more difficult road to NY6 to show for it. Plus a school in the middle of nowhere that has no market and is nowhere close to any of our other schools.

Bottom line, Boise brings nothing to the table, "killing off the mwc" is irrelevant (ie doesnt give us anymore money or status), and is a silly idea.

The only way boise is a smart add is if:
1. it guarantees us a contract NY6 bowl
2. We kick out a member
3. It guarantees us a significant jump in TV revenue dollars

I don't think any of those 3 will happen with Boise so adding them is useless.

I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

One of these is not like the other ?

(07-27-2018 03:58 AM)Fanhood Part Deaux Wrote:  This conversation will be interesting come December 2018.

Weren't you banned?

(07-27-2018 10:40 AM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:40 AM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:33 AM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 11:24 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:52 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  I'm not talking about basketball. I'm talking about how we are viewed as a football conference. And TV dollars is not the media perception I am talking about. I'm talking about the talking heads, analysts, and writers that drive and shape public opinion and perception. The ones that are driving the same narrative about P5 superiority over G5.

Rankings we aren't significantly ahead. San Diego State, Fresno State, and Boise were all ranked last year at some point.

As far a a more difficult road to the NY6... our conference would not have a more difficult road. Maybe UCF would b/c we have more competition... but the winner of our conference would be viewed as the "G5 Champion" for all intents and purposes. Our conference has only made 50% of the NY6 games, and I think that would increase to 75%-100% (only time we'd be challenged for the spot would be a rare undefeated season by another conference. Even then, a 1 loss AAC team I think could get the nod).


In my opinion, it would help our status while demoralizing the rest of the G4... which would increase our status as well just by creating a massive difference between us and everyone else. And while I don't disagree that we would be splitting up a little money... we wouldnt be sacrificing much ($6mil a year per team in a 12 team conference is $72mil, vs. the same $72mil divided by 13 teams is $5.5mil)... that little money would be worth the perception increase and almost guaranteed AAC slot in the NY6 game.

If you disagree, then we can agree to disagree...

I definitely disagree. Even in football MWC is never mentioned. I can't find a single expert who would rank the MWC ahead of AAC in football. The gap is only getting wider too. You say the media perception is we're on par with MWC. Based on what? All I see is AAC is head and shoulders above rest of the g4.


As for the ranking, you are pretty mistaken. The gap is very wide.

Final AP last year AAC had 3 teams (6, 21, 25) MWC had 1 (boise 22).
2016 - AAC - 1 (19) MWC 1 (25)
2015 - AAC - 2 (10, 18) MWC 0

Total AAC 6 - MWC 2

Bottom lines:

1. Boise wouldn't add anything to our tv contract, so in reality they'd be taking money away from us
2. Taking boise would simply make mwc more like CUSA, but wouldn't get us any closer to the p5
3. Boise would cost us a lot of $$$ in terms of travel

Also worth mentioning (something we just talked about on the TV thread) is that Boise takes a bigger share of TV revenue than the rest of the MWC. They are in a pretty good spot in that, when we beat up on each other, they swoop in with a generally unblemished record.

We obviously wouldn't go for that. They wouldn't have an automatic leg up in our conference, and would likely end up being a middling team.

See ECU 2013 (CUSA competition) vs. ECU 2015 (you fellas)......and just ignore the last two years.

Boise would not be a middling team, they would battle for the top with UH, UCF, USF and Memphis.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

One of these is not like the other ?

Coogs will be battling for the West again in no time.

Look again

(07-26-2018 07:47 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  If the TV deal really improves for the AAC we should be able to leave Boise State in the dust.

I already feel like UCF and Houston are on par with Boise's popularity. UCF national title campaign really got our brand a lot of exposure.

I don't think so. I think Boise will continue to get recruits we can't because of geography. We need to just add them and Airforce and be done with it.

(07-26-2018 08:50 AM)KnightNasty Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 08:34 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  meh boise is gonna have a really good season every 4 years or so but other than that definitely not worth adding them to the conference. They suck in everything else (bball is getting better) and are million miles away from us in a tiny state with no market. Their academics make Memphis look like harvard. They bring nothing to the table, we're not getting a better TV contract with them... all they would do is take money away from the rest of us. Killing off the MWC is irrelevant, we are already perceived as the much better conference across the board.

I wouldn't add them unless we are kicking out a member first.

We really aren’t though. We’re grouped in with the rest of the G5... in part b/c there’s not a huge step down from us to the MWC in perception, and the from there not a huge step down from the MWC to the CUSA or whatever in perception.

Adding Boise drops the MWC down to CUSA/MAC level... and creates a massive gulf between us an the G4. It would put us in a true middle class between the P5 and the G4, with us being closer to the P5 than G4... which would also help us push the P6 narrative.

We already there, bro:

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Philipvarg Wrote:  https://collegefootballnews.com/2018/07/...conference

I can't believe that win against Ole Miss in 2015 didn't count for one for Memphis. I went back and looked. They lost a third later on in the year.

(07-27-2018 07:10 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(07-26-2018 10:30 AM)Philipvarg Wrote:  https://collegefootballnews.com/2018/07/...conference

I can't believe that win against Ole Miss in 2015 didn't count for one for Memphis. I went back and looked. They lost a third later on in the year.

To Arkansas...who Toledo beat that year. I thought beating a top 25 team, with a bowl win that went 8-5 in the SEC would count as elite as well. At least comparably?

I would consider adding Boise St. only if we add BYU with them.

Preferably football only for both.

(07-27-2018 09:06 PM)Borncoog74 Wrote:  I would consider adding Boise St. only if we add BYU with them.

Preferably football only for both.

Pretty much my thoughts. Unless it is a giant splash like BYU/Boise State, it isn't worth going past 12. The western teams are at a disadvantage with the time zone.