Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
Author Message
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #21
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 05:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 04:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 04:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 02:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Tallest midget or whatever.

AAC is still BCS era CUSA not BCS era Big East.

There's not a full seat at the table, there is only the ability to follow autonomy legislation not vote to enact it and no guaranteed NY6 slot nor compensation that is closer to P5 than G5.

I get that some of the folks like to rub their weenies and say P6/G4 but neither exists and won't exist because if AAC produces programs with P5 value, they will be invited to depart AAC and join a P5 (Utah and TCU say Howdy)


I have my doubts about that these days. The CFP changed that because so much money is now pouring into P5 conferences that doesnt have anything to do with the conference TV deal. The Big 12 TV payout is only about 20 million a team while the total league distrbution per team is around 36 million. This huge bucket of non-TV revenue largely doesnt expand with increasing membership. Becasue of that, a new teams must bring enough in MEDIA ONLY tv value, to darn near equal the full $36 million value of a conference distribution share (not just the 20 million per team TV share) AND ADD to the per team payout of current members (otherwise---why add a G5 if it doesnt increase payout?). G5 members could easily be worth 20-25 million each and still not be worth anywhere near enough to warrant poaching in this environment.

Where am Im going with this? Basically, Im starting to think we have reached a point at which a conference could conceivable develop into a power conference simply because its no longer profitable to poach emerging schools in a developing conference. It would take decade or more---but I think its possible in the current landscape---where as it was not just a few years ago.

I have a feeling you are right.

And if the 10 game CCG rule had been in effect during last round, would Utah and TCU gotten the call (assuming Colorado didn't move from Big 12) BYU would have stayed in the MWC. Just need to add Boise to get to 10.

TCU, Utah, BYU, Boise, Fresno, SDSU, UNM, CSU, Wyo, AFA would be a really good conference

the rule for the CCG does not specify any number of teams for a conference to have a CCG

what the rule states is that for a conference to have a CCG they either have two divisions that are as equal in number as possible and they play a DIVISIONAL round robin and the CCG must have the winner of each division

or a conference plays a FULL CONFERENCE round robin and then the two highest ranked teams must play in the CCG

so a conference could have 9 or 8 members and have a CCG (I do not believe you can have a conference at all with fewer than 8 members in your primary sports under a totally separate NCAA rule, but it has been a while since I have read that)

in the case of the Big 12 the tier 2 contract they signed with Fox in 2011 when aggy and MU were still members required 10 teams to remain in place so when agggy and MU left for the SEC SEC SEC the Big 12 needed two teams to keep that contract in place

Yup. You need a minimum of 8. Here is a quirk that might be exploited by a group of high end independents currently anchoring major conferences. What if Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame--maybe USC and Stanford thought indy was the way to go---but wanted to have some of the security of a conference. They add 3 more teams to that core to create a 8 team conference of super teams. Lets say for grins---Clemson, Florida St, and maybe Penn St. Im not sure any long time key SEC/Big10 team would be willing to give up their traditional SEC schedule.

The downside of that conference is that half the teams will finish below .500 in conference play--limiting their season. But what if, using that new divisions rule---the conference split into 2 divisions of 4-teams. They play a round robin in the division (3-games) and one cross division game for a 4 game conference schedule. That leaves them 8 OOC games (a quasi indy way of life) to schedule any way they wish---and they are secure knowing they have enough (4) heavyweights on the schedule to make the playoff if they do well. The league would have all big names and would only divide its deal 8 ways. Thats a lot of potential money and a lot of potential flexibility--and they still have the potential 13th CCG data point if they are in the running for the playoff.

I could see something like that evolving out of the current system---especially if paying players becomes the norm.
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2019 05:29 PM by Attackcoog.)
04-11-2019 05:22 PM
Find all posts by this user
TrojanCampaign Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,692
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 170
I Root For: USC, AAMU,
Location: Huntsville
Post: #22
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 02:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Tallest midget or whatever.

AAC is still BCS era CUSA not BCS era Big East.

There's not a full seat at the table, there is only the ability to follow autonomy legislation not vote to enact it and no guaranteed NY6 slot nor compensation that is closer to P5 than G5.

I get that some of the folks like to rub their weenies and say P6/G4 but neither exists and won't exist because if AAC produces programs with P5 value, they will be invited to depart AAC and join a P5 (Utah and TCU say Howdy)

Correct me if I'm wrong. But I don't recall any CUSA making it to BCS bowls. I remember Houston was close but they lost their championship game to a sub-par Southern Miss. And I'm pretty sure CUSA did not win any national championships in basketball.

People love to hate the AAC but it's pretty dam impressive what they have done in six years.
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2019 05:26 PM by TrojanCampaign.)
04-11-2019 05:24 PM
Find all posts by this user
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #23
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 05:24 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 02:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Tallest midget or whatever.

AAC is still BCS era CUSA not BCS era Big East.

There's not a full seat at the table, there is only the ability to follow autonomy legislation not vote to enact it and no guaranteed NY6 slot nor compensation that is closer to P5 than G5.

I get that some of the folks like to rub their weenies and say P6/G4 but neither exists and won't exist because if AAC produces programs with P5 value, they will be invited to depart AAC and join a P5 (Utah and TCU say Howdy)

Correct me if I'm wrong. But I don't recall any CUSA making it to BCS bowls. I remember Houston was close but they lost their championship game to a sub-par Southern Miss. And I'm pretty sure CUSA did not win any national championships in basketball.

People love to hate the AAC but it's pretty dam impressive what they have done in six years.

CUSA has never put a team in a BCS or CFP game. BTW--that S Miss team Houston lost to wasnt "subpar". They were actually pretty good. Not saying it wasnt a big upset---it obviously was----but that S Miss team was good enough to be ranked 24th going into that game.
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2019 05:34 PM by Attackcoog.)
04-11-2019 05:33 PM
Find all posts by this user
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,930
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 264
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #24
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 05:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 05:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 04:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 04:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 02:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Tallest midget or whatever.

AAC is still BCS era CUSA not BCS era Big East.

There's not a full seat at the table, there is only the ability to follow autonomy legislation not vote to enact it and no guaranteed NY6 slot nor compensation that is closer to P5 than G5.

I get that some of the folks like to rub their weenies and say P6/G4 but neither exists and won't exist because if AAC produces programs with P5 value, they will be invited to depart AAC and join a P5 (Utah and TCU say Howdy)


I have my doubts about that these days. The CFP changed that because so much money is now pouring into P5 conferences that doesnt have anything to do with the conference TV deal. The Big 12 TV payout is only about 20 million a team while the total league distrbution per team is around 36 million. This huge bucket of non-TV revenue largely doesnt expand with increasing membership. Becasue of that, a new teams must bring enough in MEDIA ONLY tv value, to darn near equal the full $36 million value of a conference distribution share (not just the 20 million per team TV share) AND ADD to the per team payout of current members (otherwise---why add a G5 if it doesnt increase payout?). G5 members could easily be worth 20-25 million each and still not be worth anywhere near enough to warrant poaching in this environment.

Where am Im going with this? Basically, Im starting to think we have reached a point at which a conference could conceivable develop into a power conference simply because its no longer profitable to poach emerging schools in a developing conference. It would take decade or more---but I think its possible in the current landscape---where as it was not just a few years ago.

I have a feeling you are right.

And if the 10 game CCG rule had been in effect during last round, would Utah and TCU gotten the call (assuming Colorado didn't move from Big 12) BYU would have stayed in the MWC. Just need to add Boise to get to 10.

TCU, Utah, BYU, Boise, Fresno, SDSU, UNM, CSU, Wyo, AFA would be a really good conference

the rule for the CCG does not specify any number of teams for a conference to have a CCG

what the rule states is that for a conference to have a CCG they either have two divisions that are as equal in number as possible and they play a DIVISIONAL round robin and the CCG must have the winner of each division

or a conference plays a FULL CONFERENCE round robin and then the two highest ranked teams must play in the CCG

so a conference could have 9 or 8 members and have a CCG (I do not believe you can have a conference at all with fewer than 8 members in your primary sports under a totally separate NCAA rule, but it has been a while since I have read that)

in the case of the Big 12 the tier 2 contract they signed with Fox in 2011 when aggy and MU were still members required 10 teams to remain in place so when agggy and MU left for the SEC SEC SEC the Big 12 needed two teams to keep that contract in place

Yup. You need a minimum of 8. Here is a quirk that might be exploited by a group of high end independents currently anchoring major conferences. What if Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame--maybe USC and Stanford thought indy was the way to go---but wanted to have some of the security of a conference. They add 3 more teams to that core to create a 8 team conference of super teams. Lets say for grins---Clemson, Florida St, and maybe Penn St. Im not sure any long time key SEC/Big10 team would be willing to give up their traditional SEC schedule.

The downside of that conference is that half the teams will finish below .500 in conference play--limiting their season. But what if, using that new divisions rule---the conference split into 2 divisions of 4-teams. They play a round robin in the division (3-games) and one cross division game for a 4 game conference schedule. That leaves them 8 OOC games (a quasi indy way of life) to schedule any way they wish---and they are secure knowing they have enough (4) heavyweights on the schedule to make the playoff if they do well. The league would have all big names and would only divide its deal 8 ways. Thats a lot of potential money and a lot of potential flexibility--and they still have the potential 13th CCG data point if they are in the running for the playoff.

I could see something like that evolving out of the current system---especially if paying players becomes the norm.

in addition to the contractual issues with teams leaving a conference and the cost there is the issue with the NCAA not giving an AQ to the NCAAs for new conferences (in the past some teams could have taken over the WAC and done that though because the NCAA even had a window for them to rebuild)

then there is the issue of those teams getting football playoff money.....no conference that loses members is going to vote to give the new conference a cut of that money they will tell them to split the G5 pot more ways

then you have to line up NY6 bowl games and get paid for them

with what you are saying only the SEC SEC SEC would not be losing a team and would they want to play in that NY6 bowl game

no way the PAC 12 and Big 10 would move from the Rose Bowl especially after losing teams to play that new conference in the Fiester Bowl or something like that

and the ACC would be the most pissed off of all losing ND (much less Clemson and FSU)

and Stanford is at their all time greatest period in football ever in the history of their program and nothing at all says that is set to be sustainable and if they were in that new conference they could look forward to an 0-4 conference record every year and as they fall off the map getting drilled in most OOC games too

then you have the issue of OOC games......are members of the Big 12, PAC 12 and ACC especially going to schedule teams in that conference to OOC games or are they going to let them hang in the wind

that would be twice as bad for USC and Stanford that are already limited on OOC games and it would only take a couple of seasons of PAC 12 teams holding out playing them in the OOC before it hurt them

plus if the PAC 12 teams are holding out on playing USC and Stanford in their new conference even if Big 12 schools caved in and still scheduled Texas because they want the fan draw they could show unity and not schedule USC and Stanford in the OOC.....that leaves USC and Stanford looking at the MWC in their time zones (as they have to now), or BYU or they have to cross over the big 12 territory (yet another time zone) and play Big 10, SEC SEC SEC and ACC schools or they have to play other G5 schools

again that could hurt USC and Stanford in particular (Stanford it would be a death blow as far as football competitiveness)

then you still need TV contracts and sure it is assumed they would get a great one, but is it assured that ESPN really wants to start the super division plan where as you pointed out teams will be going .500 in conference or worse for several of them while getting big money (presumably) to do so and having to play OOC games that might not be appealing

that is the issue with 64 teams breaking away....who is willing to sick most years?

that is also the issue with larger conferences in general you either play your "conference mates" once every 8 years or you end up playing so many conference games that your conference moves towards and overall .500 conference record because every confernece win comes with a conference loss

that is why the SEC SEC SEC plays 8 games and same with the ACC.....and that is why the Big 12 is stupid for playing 9 conference games and instead should play 7 conference games.....because then UT and OU have very close to what you are saying the ability to play more big names yet guaranteed conference games to fill the schedule....and with 10 teams the Big 12 would still play all conference members more frequently than every other conference.....you would have a home game with all members once every 4 years
04-11-2019 05:55 PM
Find all posts by this user
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #25
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 02:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  I get that some of the folks like to rub their weenies and say P6/G4 but neither exists and won't exist because if AAC produces programs with P5 value, they will be invited to depart AAC and join a P5 (Utah and TCU say Howdy)

As we know from 10 years ago, when the MWC was saying it was the 7th BCS conference but as it turned out, only TCU and Utah "moved up". Individual programs "move up" if they excel and there's a vacancy that fits them in the right place at the right time.

(04-11-2019 04:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  And if the 10 game CCG rule had been in effect during last round, would Utah and TCU gotten the call (assuming Colorado didn't move from Big 12) BYU would have stayed in the MWC. Just need to add Boise to get to 10.

The Pac was going to add CU regardless. Somebody would have been the 12th team, probably still Utah. Any P5 conference is going to want an even number of teams for football to make divisions even and scheduling easier. Getting to an even number is the reason the ACC added Boston College, and the reason they added Louisville after Maryland left. For that matter getting to an even number is also the reason why Rutgers is in the Big Ten and Missouri is in the SEC. And once the then-11-member Big "Ten" decided it wanted a football CCG, they were going to add Nebraska or someone else.
04-11-2019 07:25 PM
Find all posts by this user
CardinalJim Offline
Welcome to The New Age
*

Posts: 16,477
Joined: Apr 2004
Reputation: 2968
I Root For: Louisville
Location: Staffordsville, KY
Post: #26
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
The American is what The Big East was. Actually I will go as far as to say The American is deeper than The Big East was its last few seasons.

Given the opportunity the best of The American could, can and has competed with the best of the P5.

In my honest opinion, the difference in The American and the other P5 conferences isn’t the top of the conference, it’s the middle and bottom. The other P5 conferences are deeper in the middle and more talented at the bottom of the conference.
04-11-2019 07:40 PM
Find all posts by this user
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,558
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 180
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #27
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
AAC, the SEC of the G5.

[Image: 630x355.jpg]
04-11-2019 07:43 PM
Find all posts by this user
GoldenWarrior11 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,628
Joined: Jul 2015
Reputation: 602
I Root For: Marquette, BE
Location: Chicago
Post: #28
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
Power conferences have been categorized by the television revenue distributed to its member teams, but they are also driven by owning the content rights to power programs. Alabama, Texas A&M, Auburn and LSU drive the SEC; Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State drive the B1G; Texas and Oklahoma drive the Big 12; USC, Oregon and Washington drive the PAC; and Florida State and Clemson drive the ACC. The AAC, in terms of athletic budgets and revenue, simply does not have any power programs that drives and anchors the value of the conference. UConn, which has the highest athletic revenue/budget of the AAC, also owns a $41 million deficit. The second highest athletic revenue of the AAC is Cincinnati - but they are 54th in the country.

In essence, the very top of the AAC is at the low end of the P5. Since the unofficial split in 2013, we have had now six years of incredibly unequal revenue distribution. Give that another cycle, and the differences between the P5 and G5 will become much more relevant and noticeable.
04-11-2019 08:32 PM
Find all posts by this user
Attackcoog Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #29
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 05:55 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 05:22 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 05:13 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 04:27 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 04:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I have my doubts about that these days. The CFP changed that because so much money is now pouring into P5 conferences that doesnt have anything to do with the conference TV deal. The Big 12 TV payout is only about 20 million a team while the total league distrbution per team is around 36 million. This huge bucket of non-TV revenue largely doesnt expand with increasing membership. Becasue of that, a new teams must bring enough in MEDIA ONLY tv value, to darn near equal the full $36 million value of a conference distribution share (not just the 20 million per team TV share) AND ADD to the per team payout of current members (otherwise---why add a G5 if it doesnt increase payout?). G5 members could easily be worth 20-25 million each and still not be worth anywhere near enough to warrant poaching in this environment.

Where am Im going with this? Basically, Im starting to think we have reached a point at which a conference could conceivable develop into a power conference simply because its no longer profitable to poach emerging schools in a developing conference. It would take decade or more---but I think its possible in the current landscape---where as it was not just a few years ago.

I have a feeling you are right.

And if the 10 game CCG rule had been in effect during last round, would Utah and TCU gotten the call (assuming Colorado didn't move from Big 12) BYU would have stayed in the MWC. Just need to add Boise to get to 10.

TCU, Utah, BYU, Boise, Fresno, SDSU, UNM, CSU, Wyo, AFA would be a really good conference

the rule for the CCG does not specify any number of teams for a conference to have a CCG

what the rule states is that for a conference to have a CCG they either have two divisions that are as equal in number as possible and they play a DIVISIONAL round robin and the CCG must have the winner of each division

or a conference plays a FULL CONFERENCE round robin and then the two highest ranked teams must play in the CCG

so a conference could have 9 or 8 members and have a CCG (I do not believe you can have a conference at all with fewer than 8 members in your primary sports under a totally separate NCAA rule, but it has been a while since I have read that)

in the case of the Big 12 the tier 2 contract they signed with Fox in 2011 when aggy and MU were still members required 10 teams to remain in place so when agggy and MU left for the SEC SEC SEC the Big 12 needed two teams to keep that contract in place

Yup. You need a minimum of 8. Here is a quirk that might be exploited by a group of high end independents currently anchoring major conferences. What if Texas, Oklahoma, Notre Dame--maybe USC and Stanford thought indy was the way to go---but wanted to have some of the security of a conference. They add 3 more teams to that core to create a 8 team conference of super teams. Lets say for grins---Clemson, Florida St, and maybe Penn St. Im not sure any long time key SEC/Big10 team would be willing to give up their traditional SEC schedule.

The downside of that conference is that half the teams will finish below .500 in conference play--limiting their season. But what if, using that new divisions rule---the conference split into 2 divisions of 4-teams. They play a round robin in the division (3-games) and one cross division game for a 4 game conference schedule. That leaves them 8 OOC games (a quasi indy way of life) to schedule any way they wish---and they are secure knowing they have enough (4) heavyweights on the schedule to make the playoff if they do well. The league would have all big names and would only divide its deal 8 ways. Thats a lot of potential money and a lot of potential flexibility--and they still have the potential 13th CCG data point if they are in the running for the playoff.

I could see something like that evolving out of the current system---especially if paying players becomes the norm.

in addition to the contractual issues with teams leaving a conference and the cost there is the issue with the NCAA not giving an AQ to the NCAAs for new conferences (in the past some teams could have taken over the WAC and done that though because the NCAA even had a window for them to rebuild)

then there is the issue of those teams getting football playoff money.....no conference that loses members is going to vote to give the new conference a cut of that money they will tell them to split the G5 pot more ways

then you have to line up NY6 bowl games and get paid for them

with what you are saying only the SEC SEC SEC would not be losing a team and would they want to play in that NY6 bowl game

no way the PAC 12 and Big 10 would move from the Rose Bowl especially after losing teams to play that new conference in the Fiester Bowl or something like that

and the ACC would be the most pissed off of all losing ND (much less Clemson and FSU)

and Stanford is at their all time greatest period in football ever in the history of their program and nothing at all says that is set to be sustainable and if they were in that new conference they could look forward to an 0-4 conference record every year and as they fall off the map getting drilled in most OOC games too

then you have the issue of OOC games......are members of the Big 12, PAC 12 and ACC especially going to schedule teams in that conference to OOC games or are they going to let them hang in the wind

that would be twice as bad for USC and Stanford that are already limited on OOC games and it would only take a couple of seasons of PAC 12 teams holding out playing them in the OOC before it hurt them

plus if the PAC 12 teams are holding out on playing USC and Stanford in their new conference even if Big 12 schools caved in and still scheduled Texas because they want the fan draw they could show unity and not schedule USC and Stanford in the OOC.....that leaves USC and Stanford looking at the MWC in their time zones (as they have to now), or BYU or they have to cross over the big 12 territory (yet another time zone) and play Big 10, SEC SEC SEC and ACC schools or they have to play other G5 schools

again that could hurt USC and Stanford in particular (Stanford it would be a death blow as far as football competitiveness)

then you still need TV contracts and sure it is assumed they would get a great one, but is it assured that ESPN really wants to start the super division plan where as you pointed out teams will be going .500 in conference or worse for several of them while getting big money (presumably) to do so and having to play OOC games that might not be appealing

that is the issue with 64 teams breaking away....who is willing to sick most years?

that is also the issue with larger conferences in general you either play your "conference mates" once every 8 years or you end up playing so many conference games that your conference moves towards and overall .500 conference record because every confernece win comes with a conference loss

that is why the SEC SEC SEC plays 8 games and same with the ACC.....and that is why the Big 12 is stupid for playing 9 conference games and instead should play 7 conference games.....because then UT and OU have very close to what you are saying the ability to play more big names yet guaranteed conference games to fill the schedule....and with 10 teams the Big 12 would still play all conference members more frequently than every other conference.....you would have a home game with all members once every 4 years

Of all that--the only real issue is exit fees. A conference of Texas, Oklahoma, Stanford, USC, Clemson, Florida St, and Penn State is going to be given a waiver for NCAA auto-bids. Whoever wins that conference in the sports that matter would be getting an at large bid anyway---so they are arent really stealing a berth (same reason the Big East was given a pass in 2013).

As for bowls---every bowl would line up for a 8 team conference where every single team is a king pin program. There is zero down side to tying your bowl to a league like that. Thats a bowl committee's wet dream. If the Big12 no longer has Texas or Oklahoma---that might be how a SEC vs Super Conference Sugar Bowl might develop. But--like I said---any bowl would love to tie itself to the new super conference--they would have a ton of options. Point is---that group of 8 will have no issues lining up bowls.

Contractually, when it comes to the CFP---you'd probably wait until a renegotaion year get lined up for that---but since ESPN is essentially the only buyer--do you think they want a CFP that doesnt include those 8 big time teams? Probably not. My guess is timing wont matter much as it will trigger a renegotiation of an " early extension" to deal with the unprecedented situation and to retool the CFP to reflect the new power structure.
(This post was last modified: 04-11-2019 11:24 PM by Attackcoog.)
04-11-2019 08:33 PM
Find all posts by this user
TrojanCampaign Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,692
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 170
I Root For: USC, AAMU,
Location: Huntsville
Post: #30
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 08:32 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  Power conferences have been categorized by the television revenue distributed to its member teams, but they are also driven by owning the content rights to power programs. Alabama, Texas A&M, Auburn and LSU drive the SEC; Michigan, Ohio State and Penn State drive the B1G; Texas and Oklahoma drive the Big 12; USC, USC, and USC drive the PAC; and Florida State and Clemson drive the ACC. The AAC, in terms of athletic budgets and revenue, simply does not have any power programs that drives and anchors the value of the conference. UConn, which has the highest athletic revenue/budget of the AAC, also owns a $41 million deficit. The second highest athletic revenue of the AAC is Cincinnati - but they are 54th in the country.

In essence, the very top of the AAC is at the low end of the P5. Since the unofficial split in 2013, we have had now six years of incredibly unequal revenue distribution. Give that another cycle, and the differences between the P5 and G5 will become much more relevant and noticeable.

Fixed that for you.
04-11-2019 08:36 PM
Find all posts by this user
TrojanCampaign Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,692
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 170
I Root For: USC, AAMU,
Location: Huntsville
Post: #31
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 07:40 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The American is what The Big East was. Actually I will go as far as to say The American is deeper than The Big East was its last few seasons.

Given the opportunity the best of The American could, can and has competed with the best of the P5.

In my honest opinion, the difference in The American and the other P5 conferences isn’t the top of the conference, it’s the middle and bottom. The other P5 conferences are deeper in the middle and more talented at the bottom of the conference.

Honestly, they are not far behind the PAC-12 in football. UCF absolutely could have beaten Washington imo.
04-11-2019 08:40 PM
Find all posts by this user
UTEPDallas Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,002
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation: 330
I Root For: UTEP/Penn State
Location: Dallas, TX
Post: #32
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 05:24 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 02:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Tallest midget or whatever.

AAC is still BCS era CUSA not BCS era Big East.

There's not a full seat at the table, there is only the ability to follow autonomy legislation not vote to enact it and no guaranteed NY6 slot nor compensation that is closer to P5 than G5.

I get that some of the folks like to rub their weenies and say P6/G4 but neither exists and won't exist because if AAC produces programs with P5 value, they will be invited to depart AAC and join a P5 (Utah and TCU say Howdy)

Correct me if I'm wrong. But I don't recall any CUSA making it to BCS bowls. I remember Houston was close but they lost their championship game to a sub-par Southern Miss. And I'm pretty sure CUSA did not win any national championships in basketball.

People love to hate the AAC but it's pretty dam impressive what they have done in six years.

Probably he meant the AAC in the CFP era is what C-USA (where the majority of the AAC schools came from) was in the BCS era access wise (nonAQ) while the Big East was an AQ league.

If the BCS rules that were relaxed after 2005 were in effect in the first eight years of the BCS, Tulane (1998), TCU (2001) and Louisville (2004) would’ve crashed the BCS as the C-USA reps.
04-11-2019 09:16 PM
Find all posts by this user
loki_the_bubba Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,697
Joined: Jul 2010
Reputation: 701
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location:
Post: #33
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
We all have a ten mile gap to cross as the P5 speed off into the distance and the AAC has a 500 yd lead on the rest of us. Congrats.
04-11-2019 09:20 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #34
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 12:18 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Listen slightly over half way through. Sorry, it doesn't show the exact minute/second where this discussion begins.

He also said "there is no P6". So why isn't that your header? 04-cheers
04-11-2019 09:35 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #35
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 09:20 PM)loki_the_bubba Wrote:  We all have a ten mile gap to cross as the P5 speed off into the distance and the AAC has a 500 yd lead on the rest of us. Congrats.

That's not quite accurate but it's close. If the college world was the USA, and the P5 are in NYC while the other Gs are in San Francisco, the AAC financially is in about Salt Lake City.

Ahead of the other Gs? Yes.

Closer to the Ps than the Gs? Not by a long shot.
04-11-2019 09:38 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #36
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 07:40 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The American is what The Big East was. Actually I will go as far as to say The American is deeper than The Big East was its last few seasons.

Actually, if you look at metrics like Sagarin and Massey, that's not remotely true.

E.g., over the last 8 seasons of the Big East, when USF and Louisville were members, the Big East was, on average, equal in strength to the B1G and the ACC in football.

The Big East was only the last-ranked BCS (AQ) conference twice during those 8 years, and it's overall average ranking was 4.5 out of 6. Twice the Big East finished second among the BCS conferences.

In contrast, the AAC has never come within a mile of finishing ahead of *any* of the A5 conferences. None of them. It has finished behind other G5 conferences, including this year.

And in hoops of course they aren't in the same galaxy, the Big East of the late 2000s was often the #1 basketball conference, the AAC has never been higher than 6th.
04-11-2019 09:51 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #37
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 12:42 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  The AAC is the best non power football and basketball conference and it’s not even close.

Actually, in football, the AAC and MWC have been very close. In the past five years, the AAC has been the #1 G5 conference 3 times, the MWC 2 times, including this past year.

The MWC and AAC have actually waged a very close battle on the field for football supremacy. There hasn't been any separation there.
04-11-2019 09:54 PM
Find all posts by this user
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #38
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 09:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 12:42 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  The AAC is the best non power football and basketball conference and it’s not even close.

Actually, in football, the AAC and MWC have been very close. In the past five years, the AAC has been the #1 G5 conference 3 times, the MWC 2 times, including this past year.

The MWC and AAC have actually waged a very close battle on the field for football supremacy. There hasn't been any separation there.
Yep.
Since 2013 in the final alignment, the MW is 12-8 over the AAC in football.
04-11-2019 10:36 PM
Find all posts by this user
Kit-Cat Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #39
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 09:54 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 12:42 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  The AAC is the best non power football and basketball conference and it’s not even close.

Actually, in football, the AAC and MWC have been very close. In the past five years, the AAC has been the #1 G5 conference 3 times, the MWC 2 times, including this past year.

The MWC and AAC have actually waged a very close battle on the field for football supremacy. There hasn't been any separation there.

In the things that matter, sending teams to CFP games and recruiting the AAC has left the MWC in the dust.
04-11-2019 11:45 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Kit-Cat Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,000
Joined: Jun 2002
Reputation: 125
I Root For: Championships
Location:

CrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappiesCrappies
Post: #40
RE: AP Top 25 podcast/Ralph Russo says AAC has separated from G4
(04-11-2019 04:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(04-11-2019 02:46 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Tallest midget or whatever.

AAC is still BCS era CUSA not BCS era Big East.

There's not a full seat at the table, there is only the ability to follow autonomy legislation not vote to enact it and no guaranteed NY6 slot nor compensation that is closer to P5 than G5.

I get that some of the folks like to rub their weenies and say P6/G4 but neither exists and won't exist because if AAC produces programs with P5 value, they will be invited to depart AAC and join a P5 (Utah and TCU say Howdy)


I have my doubts about that these days. The CFP changed that because so much money is now pouring into P5 conferences that doesnt have anything to do with the conference TV deal. The Big 12 TV payout is only about 20 million a team while the total league distrbution per team is around 36 million. This huge bucket of non-TV revenue largely doesnt expand with increasing membership. Becasue of that, a new teams must bring enough in MEDIA ONLY tv value, to darn near equal the full $36 million value of a conference distribution share (not just the 20 million per team TV share) AND ADD to the per team payout of current members (otherwise---why add a G5 if it doesnt increase payout?). G5 members could easily be worth 20-25 million each and still not be worth anywhere near enough to warrant poaching in this environment.

Where am Im going with this? Basically, Im starting to think we have reached a point at which a conference could conceivable develop into a power conference simply because its no longer profitable to poach emerging schools in a developing conference. It would take decade or more---but I think its possible in the current landscape---where as it was not just a few years ago.

What I'm fairly certain the AAC dilemma is going to do is force the CFP to expand in bowls and probably playoff spots.

One CFP bowl for 5 conferences just isn't enough IMO.
04-11-2019 11:49 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.