(06-26-2019 12:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  UAB is okay but nothing special. I'm more interested in Old Dominion and even Charlotte among C-USA schools, not to mention that if justice is served, the next spot should go to Southern Miss. How pissed were they to see Tulsa and Tulane get a shot before them?

(06-26-2019 12:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  UAB is okay but nothing special. I'm more interested in Old Dominion and even Charlotte among C-USA schools, not to mention that if justice is served, the next spot should go to Southern Miss. How pissed were they to see Tulsa and Tulane get a shot before them?

Justice is a mirage. If there was any "football justice" in these things, Boise State would already be in the Big 12 or Pac-12.

(06-26-2019 12:33 PM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 11:31 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 10:41 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 10:38 AM)bluesox Wrote:  Perfect is the enemy of the good ? UAB is a pretty good pick up for the AAC but not perfect. The reality is the AAC will do what espn tells them. My guess is that is 1 pick up with

Air Force, BYU, Army / VCU the perfect pick but unlikely. After that, I think UAB has good odds

Agreed.

The obvious best-case scenario would be the AAC expanding west. Any scenario involving BYU, Boise State, or Army would in my opinion be an upgrade for the AAC.


But UAB would not be a bad second option.

AAC will add whoever ESPN says is worth the money to add, or no one. Maybe they think UAB is worth 7 million a year, but I kinda doubt it. If they were worth anything close to that the C-USA deal wouldn't be worth nothing on networks I didn't even know existed.

Well, replace UAB with an AAC team. If it were ECU right now would ECU bring 7 million to the conference? Every conference is built upon the success of a core group of schools. In the AAC it has been UCF, Houston, Memphis, and Cincinnati.


BYU is the only school that would bring 7 million.

This is a much different situation than the last time the AAC lost teams. The league is in no way desperate to add anyone. This isn't a "add teams or the league's going to fold" situation it's add a team if they improve the value of the league. Right now that's an insanely short list. If you swapped ECU and UAB and ECU were still in C-USA if you want me to answer honestly no ESPN wouldn't value ECU as a 7 million a year candidate. They wouldn't value Tulane or Tulsa at that level either. This is why I expect the AAC to stay at 11 and ESPN to pro rate the deal down 1/12th (or maybe a slight bit more) for the loss of UCONN.

(06-26-2019 01:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 01:18 PM)jwawker Wrote:  Only attractive candidates: BYU, Army, Boise are not realistic candidates. Stand pat at 11, eliminate divisions, 1 plays 2 in conference championship game.

Im not convinced that standing pat is an option ESPN will go for. Frankly, Im absolutely certain its not a smart long term option for a conference that could be poached in a few years.

I think the question is would ESPN rather pro rate the deal down for the AAC to stay at 11 or pay 7 million a year for UAB/ODU/Charlotte/Buffalo/etc to be added? (assuming of course all the obvious candidates say no) Same reason the B12 didn't add anyone. No one they can get increases the value of the league and everyone they can get will still be there and willing to take the invite a few years from now if necessary.

I'm not quoting the post but La. Tech has zero chance of associating with the current nucleus of the AAC.

(06-26-2019 02:26 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  I'm not quoting the post but La. Tech has zero chance of associating with the current nucleus of the AAC.

They really have been one of the most consistent in CUSA among all major sports though. Good program.

They have no media market (Shreveport? and that's only a maybe) and they have a limited amount of current fans let alone potential new fans. They've done nothing to stand out in the major sports (I'd need some top 25 activity and/or maybe some major postseason activity and memorable major conference scalps).

(06-26-2019 01:54 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 12:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  UAB is okay but nothing special. I'm more interested in Old Dominion and even Charlotte among C-USA schools, not to mention that if justice is served, the next spot should go to Southern Miss. How pissed were they to see Tulsa and Tulane get a shot before them?

Justice is a mirage. If there was any "football justice" in these things, Boise State would already be in the Big 12 or Pac-12.

Well the coaching staff got in the P12, at Washington.

(06-26-2019 02:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 01:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 01:18 PM)jwawker Wrote:  Only attractive candidates: BYU, Army, Boise are not realistic candidates. Stand pat at 11, eliminate divisions, 1 plays 2 in conference championship game.

Im not convinced that standing pat is an option ESPN will go for. Frankly, Im absolutely certain its not a smart long term option for a conference that could be poached in a few years.

I think the question is would ESPN rather pro rate the deal down for the AAC to stay at 11 or pay 7 million a year for UAB/ODU/Charlotte/Buffalo/etc to be added? (assuming of course all the obvious candidates say no) Same reason the B12 didn't add anyone. No one they can get increases the value of the league and everyone they can get will still be there and willing to take the invite a few years from now if necessary.

Why would anybody argue with this.

(06-26-2019 08:34 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 02:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 01:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 01:18 PM)jwawker Wrote:  Only attractive candidates: BYU, Army, Boise are not realistic candidates. Stand pat at 11, eliminate divisions, 1 plays 2 in conference championship game.

Im not convinced that standing pat is an option ESPN will go for. Frankly, Im absolutely certain its not a smart long term option for a conference that could be poached in a few years.

I think the question is would ESPN rather pro rate the deal down for the AAC to stay at 11 or pay 7 million a year for UAB/ODU/Charlotte/Buffalo/etc to be added? (assuming of course all the obvious candidates say no) Same reason the B12 didn't add anyone. No one they can get increases the value of the league and everyone they can get will still be there and willing to take the invite a few years from now if necessary.

Why would anybody argue with this.

Just to have something to argue I guess. ESPN is going to want what is best for their bottom line. It sounds like they do have the ability to renegotiate the deal with the loss of UCONN, but I highly doubt there's any contractual provision that would allow them to slash the deal in half. They aren't going to be able to say in a fair renegotiation that they value UCONN sports at $40 million a year, we all know that's nonsense. Only wildcard addition I could see outside of the obvious names is if ESPN wants to take a page out of their old playbook and have the AAC add a MWC team not named Air Force/Boise just to weaken their upcoming contract negotiating position.

(06-26-2019 01:11 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 12:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  UAB is okay but nothing special. I'm more interested in Old Dominion and even Charlotte among C-USA schools, not to mention that if justice is served, the next spot should go to Southern Miss. How pissed were they to see Tulsa and Tulane get a shot before them?

I find it very unlikely that recent move ups that have had almost no success in CUSA---are going to be likely candidates for that open slot. The other often mentioned CUSA candidate is S MIss---but S Miss is just 34-53 since 2012. Strangely, one of the few schools in CUSA that has been a pretty consistent football performer over the last 8 to 10 years is rarely mentioned---LaTech.

LaTech is 63-41 over the last 8 seasons with only one below .500 year. But with a very small market and a very low budget---they seem fairly unlikely to be the choice either. Marshall would be similar to LaTech in wins. Marshall is 65-39 over the last 8 seasons with just 2 below .500 years. But---the same problems as Tech---small market and low budget.

My guess is if the top choices fall through (AF, Army, BYU), and ESPN wants a 12th school, then a MW front range school would make a reasonable replacement. The geography would be viable--and those schools would be an institutional match, an academic match, and a budgetary match. Given that those front range schools are all getting a smaller pay day so Boise can get a bigger pay day---there might be enough of an opening to pry someone like Colorado St loose from the MW. CSU has had some success in both football and basketball. Not a home run---but a solid performer that will challenge for the division every few years. Grabbing a school like CSU might be the crack in the dam that leads to getting a BYU or Air Force down the line.

Everyone knows we went 4-32 from 2012 to 2014. Starting from that date is deliberate, and does you no credit. It just gives me an opening to point out that the four seasons since then include a 30-21 record, four wins over LaTech, three straight wins versus Marshall, and a road win over the SEC. We’ve also been bowl eligible 22 times in the last 25 years.

(06-26-2019 01:44 PM)Pervis_Griffith Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 10:25 AM)TrojanCampaign Wrote:  I'm actually surprised that I have seen no mention of UAB yet:

- UAB has great academics
- Birmingham is a huge market for college football and while everyone is an Alabama fan. People would definitely watch UAB play teams like Houston and Memphis.
- UAB is not a powerhouse but they certainly could pull their weight in basketball and baseball.
- Brand new stadium
- Birmingham as a city is going through a rebirth of growth

Most importantly I think their football team really has potential. UAB will never steal the 4-5 star recruits that Alabama produces from UA and AU. But UAB could easily become who gets the plethora of 3 star recruits that are still left in the state. Right now they split what's left with Troy, UNA, Alabama A&M, and Mississippi State.

You haven't seen UAB advocated for???

How about this thread .... https://csnbbs.com/thread-878144.html

There's all KINDS of UAB up in there.

Lol, didn't read every post.

If only the BOT issues could be resolved, UAB would be an exceptionally strong candidate. By far the best in C-USA.

If only...

(06-26-2019 12:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  UAB is okay but nothing special. I'm more interested in Old Dominion and even Charlotte among C-USA schools, not to mention that if justice is served, the next spot should go to Southern Miss. How pissed were they to see Tulsa and Tulane get a shot before them?

I am a little afraid C-USA will lose UAB. ODU is on the fringes of the C-USA footprint, and I have not seen many visiting fans at Rice, or at the Biloxi baseball tournaments.

UAB seems to have a much larger alumni presence in Houston, and they are at the heart of the C-USA geography.

I am quietly hoping for ODU rather than UAB or Southern Miss. Can we pay you to take Charlotte?

(06-27-2019 10:05 AM)DustMyBroom Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 01:11 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-26-2019 12:50 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  UAB is okay but nothing special. I'm more interested in Old Dominion and even Charlotte among C-USA schools, not to mention that if justice is served, the next spot should go to Southern Miss. How pissed were they to see Tulsa and Tulane get a shot before them?

I find it very unlikely that recent move ups that have had almost no success in CUSA---are going to be likely candidates for that open slot. The other often mentioned CUSA candidate is S MIss---but S Miss is just 34-53 since 2012. Strangely, one of the few schools in CUSA that has been a pretty consistent football performer over the last 8 to 10 years is rarely mentioned---LaTech.

LaTech is 63-41 over the last 8 seasons with only one below .500 year. But with a very small market and a very low budget---they seem fairly unlikely to be the choice either. Marshall would be similar to LaTech in wins. Marshall is 65-39 over the last 8 seasons with just 2 below .500 years. But---the same problems as Tech---small market and low budget.

My guess is if the top choices fall through (AF, Army, BYU), and ESPN wants a 12th school, then a MW front range school would make a reasonable replacement. The geography would be viable--and those schools would be an institutional match, an academic match, and a budgetary match. Given that those front range schools are all getting a smaller pay day so Boise can get a bigger pay day---there might be enough of an opening to pry someone like Colorado St loose from the MW. CSU has had some success in both football and basketball. Not a home run---but a solid performer that will challenge for the division every few years. Grabbing a school like CSU might be the crack in the dam that leads to getting a BYU or Air Force down the line.

Everyone knows we went 4-32 from 2012 to 2014. Starting from that date is deliberate, and does you no credit. It just gives me an opening to point out that the four seasons since then include a 30-21 record, four wins over LaTech, three straight wins versus Marshall, and a road win over the SEC. We’ve also been bowl eligible 22 times in the last 25 years.

I used that date because the 2011 season was basically the recent high water mark for USM. Since winning CUSA and finishing ranked in 2011---USM has just not been the same program and the win loss totals bear that out. By the way, USM fans love to point the fact they had a winning record vs UH during their CUSA years------but everyone knows that period is also when the UH program was going through its lowest point in decades. So, why is using the USM peformance against UH during it lowest point fair and reasonable----but pointing out that USM has fallen off since 2011 is not fair?

Here's what I really believe. The recruiting pie that USM had to itself for years is being divided more ways these days as new schools have moved up or developed during the last 10-15 years within its traditional recruiting territory. As those schools have eaten into the recruiting base, its made USM less dominant. The days of 17 winning seasons in a row are pretty much gone. A couple of bad coaching hires certainly added to the problem this decade. However, the changes within the recruiting territory are simply making USM more like other G5's in the area. Im not saying USM will be bad. Im saying USM will be more up and down. Doesnt mean they wont have very successful years---I believe USM absolutely will have big years. But I also suspect down years will occur far more regularly than they did a decade ago. Thats why I think trying to use numbers from 20 years ago is simply misleading and reflects a bygone era--not the current reality.

In all honesty, USM hasn't been great since the initial Big East raid. They only got bowl eligible most years until peaking under Fedora then falling off a cliff temporarily before stablizing.

Which kind of is a debilitating blow. Southern Miss was always good but never great.

That said, they did belong in the original AAC.

(06-27-2019 02:14 PM)_C2_ Wrote:  In all honesty, USM hasn't been great since the initial Big East raid. They only got bowl eligible most years until peaking under Fedora then falling off a cliff temporarily before stablizing.

Which kind of is a debilitating blow. Southern Miss was always good but never great.

That said, they did belong in the original AAC.

Without naming names, if I were king, there are current members I would replace with USM if I could. However, I dont like the idea of increasing the current number of former CUSA members in the AAC as thats already a point of criticism for the league. I agree that they probably should have been part of the original group that left to form the AAC in 2011/2012.