Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
Author Message
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,464
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 479
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #101
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 11:20 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  Regarding UConn's ability to fill out an independent schedule for 2020, someone on fbschedules.com commented that Idaho and New Mexico State were able to assemble a 12 game independent schedule in 2013 on even shorter notice when the WAC football conference dissolved. I'm sure UConn will be fine as an independent. They just have to figure out recruiting and learn how to win again, which is completely possible.

It took me less than an hour each to produce 2020 and 2021 schedules for UConn that gave them 6 home games with only one FCS opponent. They won't have any trouble getting a decent schedule.
07-02-2019 12:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Native Georgian Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,765
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 561
I Root For: TULANE+GA.STATE
Location: Decatur GA
Post: #102
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 12:13 PM)ken d Wrote:  It took me less than an hour each to produce 2020 and 2021 schedules for UConn that gave them 6 home games with only one FCS opponent. They won't have any trouble getting a decent schedule.
Can you show us the example-schedules you came up with?
07-02-2019 05:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,942
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 139
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #103
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-01-2019 11:25 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(07-01-2019 04:27 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  AC
First the MAC could show the NCAA the plan to get into compliance. I have stated multiple times, if the NCAA shows it is working on getting in compliance, there would be no issue with the waiver until another team is added. The AAC basically has stated there are no plans to get in compliance because we don't want too. Thus thy I think the NCAA could easily deny the waiver.

If the AAC requests the FBS Conferences to change the rule, and the conferences vote against it. I have a hard time seeing the NCAA then granting a waiver because the AAC still refuses to add a 12th team. If they offer a 12th team and that team had issues preventing them from joining until 2022, I would see the waiver granted. I think if the Aresco would have just simply stated the AAC would address the need to add a 12th team if required to meet the rules if the CCG are not changed. He basically stated the AAC will do what is in the AAC best interest no matter if the majority of the conferences vote against the rule change. That is why I see a waiver not occurring without a plan to get into compliance.

I think AAC could do a whole lot better than Aresco. He tends to either show his hand to early or vastly overplays it. Some times it is better to let subordinates or proxies go public and keep quiet. He reminds of Biden, apparently everybody likes him but they know the guy is a gaffe blowhard that will go off at the wrong time.

Note - Biden is an example comparison not saying if his politics are correct or incorrect.

I get what your saying, and perhaps it will end up costing Aresco if the issue becomes hotly contested---but Aresco has very good relationships with the other conference commissioners. He generally goes out of his way to be cordial and deferential. As an example, the UCF fans were very angry at Aresco a year ago because he played down the UCF National Championship claim. He refused to get involved with it beyond saying "the UCF fans and leadership are just having fun with it".

The truth is, for all we know, he may have reached out to the other leagues and already knows he has the votes in hand for the waiver. I really expect that this will be an easy rubber stamp type deal and not adversarial at all. Its not a "I win/you lose" type of vote. A MAC type waiver is more like the house keeping part of the typical session where you do fairly routine non-controversial voice vote type of motions. If someone has a big objection---then perhaps it might get more iffy--but I just dont really see that as very likely. I guess we will see how it plays out. 04-cheers

AC,
Sometimes it is best to go best to what exactly the question is. I think I have not done that or if you provided, I missed it entirely.

Exactly what would the AAC be asking a waiver for in regards to what requirement? I think many have been focused on the AAC staying at 11 instead of what would the waiver request look like. I am raising my hand as guilty of focusing on the 11 question.04-cheers
(This post was last modified: 07-02-2019 06:33 PM by msm96wolf.)
07-02-2019 06:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
sierrajip Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,516
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 67
I Root For: UCF
Location:
Post: #104
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 12:13 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:20 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  Regarding UConn's ability to fill out an independent schedule for 2020, someone on fbschedules.com commented that Idaho and New Mexico State were able to assemble a 12 game independent schedule in 2013 on even shorter notice when the WAC football conference dissolved. I'm sure UConn will be fine as an independent. They just have to figure out recruiting and learn how to win again, which is completely possible.

It took me less than an hour each to produce 2020 and 2021 schedules for UConn that gave them 6 home games with only one FCS opponent. They won't have any trouble getting a decent schedule.

Great. Hope it works.
07-02-2019 09:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RutgersMike Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 210
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 12
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #105
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
Would the Shockers be interested going to IA again?
07-02-2019 10:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 35,559
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1060
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #106
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 10:34 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:29 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 05:53 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(07-01-2019 09:46 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  The Sun Belt would stay at 9 football members before inviting NMSU or Liberty.
At 9 football members, under the amended rules you can have a top two CCG on an eight game schedule, since that is a complete conference round robin. But there aren't two more AAC schools in UConn's situation, so that's not going to be the resolution at this point in time.

I thought you needed 10 teams to have a ccg.

Actually, maybe you do, maybe the "less than 12" language is after the "10 or more" has already been put into place ... let me look that up ... though the manual is on the other computer, so I have to grab a fresh one ...

{tick tock tick tock}
Quote: 17.10.5.2.1 Bowl Subdivision. [FBS] In bowl subdivision football, the maximum number of football contests shall exclude the following: (Revised: 1/10/90, 11/1/07 effective 8/1/08, 10/28/10, 10/27/11 effective 4/1/12, Adopted: 8/2/12 effective 8/1/14, 1/15/16 effective 8/1/16) (a) Spring Game. One contest at the conclusion of the spring practice period [see Bylaw 17.10.4-(a)], provided the contest is against a team composed of bona fide alumni or students or both; (b) Conference Championship Game. One conference championship game: (1) Between division champions of a conference that is divided into two divisions (as equally balanced in number as possible) and conducts round-robin, regular-season competition in each division; or (2) Between the top two teams in the conference standings following full round-robin regular-season competition among all members of the conference.

... this allowed a 10 school conference to have a CCG, which is likely how it was reported, but it doesn't require that to be a 10 school conference. Maybe it has a limit 10 or more elsewhere in the rules, but not in the exemption that allows a 13th, CCG game.

From what I've seen, its not unheard of for something like that to be the case. One rule specifies something. Another rule doesn't bother to mention the first rule. The rule book is not well written.
07-02-2019 10:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 35,559
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1060
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #107
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 11:22 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:12 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:29 AM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 05:53 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  At 9 football members, under the amended rules you can have a top two CCG on an eight game schedule, since that is a complete conference round robin. But there aren't two more AAC schools in UConn's situation, so that's not going to be the resolution at this point in time.

I thought you needed 10 teams to have a ccg.

no requirements for number of teams

except the overall NCAA rule of 8 teams to make a conference

The Sunbelt would probably be very happy with 9

Except that they already have 10 members. The 10th one probably wouldn't be happy.

the discussion was about what The Sunbelt would do if they lost a team and specifically with NMSU and Liberty available

Yes. The assumption was that the AAC picks a 12th team from MAC or CUSA. Then the MAC backfills from CUSA or SunBelt and/or the CUSA backfills from SunBelt. Ultimately, its the Sun Belt that loses a team.
07-02-2019 10:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TodgeRodge Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,542
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 177
I Root For: Todge
Location: Westlake
Post: #108
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 10:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:22 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:12 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:29 AM)bullet Wrote:  I thought you needed 10 teams to have a ccg.

no requirements for number of teams

except the overall NCAA rule of 8 teams to make a conference

The Sunbelt would probably be very happy with 9

Except that they already have 10 members. The 10th one probably wouldn't be happy.

the discussion was about what The Sunbelt would do if they lost a team and specifically with NMSU and Liberty available

Yes. The assumption was that the AAC picks a 12th team from MAC or CUSA. Then the MAC backfills from CUSA or SunBelt and/or the CUSA backfills from SunBelt. Ultimately, its the Sun Belt that loses a team.

at this point I am not sure the MAC or CUSA or Sunbelt could pull a team from any of the other two

no matter what anyone says The Sunbelt is a better football conference than CUSA right now (and probably baseball too) so it would not be a great move for any program

and I do not know what the exit fees are for The Sunbelt or MAC, but they are over $5 million (closer to $7) for the CUSA

https://www.herald-dispatch.com/sports/m...7762a.html

there is no money difference between the two conferences to make it worth even a $1 million exit fee to switch and especially for a team from The Sunbelt to CUSA if CUSA lost their best team.....the CUSA would be much less appealing at that point

perhaps if the exit fee was under $1 million or right at $1 million a team might move because they are dumb enough to buy into the "play with teams in our state or region" argument that is generally a failure

I think that is just another reason that the MAC, CUSA and The Sunbelt will not worry about voting against a waiver based on "oh nooz we might lose a team"......I think most of them would welcome the loss of a team especially if it came with a couple of million dollars or more

and I don't think the MWC feels the pressure at all about losing a team and they will be very concerned with helping the AAC get a better CCG match up
07-02-2019 11:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,757
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 147
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #109
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 11:14 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  ... The assumption was that the AAC picks a 12th team from MAC or CUSA. Then the MAC backfills from CUSA or SunBelt and/or the CUSA backfills from SunBelt. Ultimately, its the Sun Belt that loses a team.

at this point I am not sure the MAC or CUSA or Sunbelt could pull a team from any of the other two ...

Last two times the MAC was faced with adding a team (to balance Temple, then to balance UMass), it was by inviting (UMass) or preparing to invite (JMU) an FCS school, not by raiding another conference. At the same time, the only full time member to leave since the 80's was Marshall, and the previous one came back ... for a full time member leaving the conference for good, it's Marshall in the 90's and then you go back to the 50's.

And the CUSA that Marshall left for is not the CUSA of today. If the CUSA raiding the Sunbelt dynamic has played itself out, then, yeah, it could be that CUSA, SBC and the MAC aren't in a strong position to raid each other to backfill.

Further, with 14 members, CUSA in particular may find itself in a position of being raided, looking around, and not seeing any upgrade available over standing pat.
07-03-2019 04:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
panite Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,869
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 111
I Root For: Owls-SC-RU-Navy
Location:
Post: #110
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 10:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:22 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:12 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:29 AM)bullet Wrote:  I thought you needed 10 teams to have a ccg.

no requirements for number of teams

except the overall NCAA rule of 8 teams to make a conference

The Sunbelt would probably be very happy with 9

Except that they already have 10 members. The 10th one probably wouldn't be happy.

the discussion was about what The Sunbelt would do if they lost a team and specifically with NMSU and Liberty available

Yes. The assumption was that the AAC picks a 12th team from MAC or CUSA. Then the MAC backfills from CUSA or SunBelt and/or the CUSA backfills from SunBelt. Ultimately, its the Sun Belt that loses a team.

The AAC would take independent UMASS before it would take a MAC team. The first choice would come from BYU, Army, the AFA or another MWC team. The second choice would be to go after another CUSA team or UMass. The third choice in their decision tree would probably be a decision to remain at 11 for FB and 11 for BB/ Olympic Sports until the next potential realignment period passes through. Don't see enough value or any up side at all for the AAC to poach a MAC or Sun Belt team. 04-cheers
07-03-2019 09:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Online
Legend
*

Posts: 35,559
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 1060
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #111
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 11:14 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:22 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:12 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:36 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  no requirements for number of teams

except the overall NCAA rule of 8 teams to make a conference

The Sunbelt would probably be very happy with 9

Except that they already have 10 members. The 10th one probably wouldn't be happy.

the discussion was about what The Sunbelt would do if they lost a team and specifically with NMSU and Liberty available

Yes. The assumption was that the AAC picks a 12th team from MAC or CUSA. Then the MAC backfills from CUSA or SunBelt and/or the CUSA backfills from SunBelt. Ultimately, its the Sun Belt that loses a team.

at this point I am not sure the MAC or CUSA or Sunbelt could pull a team from any of the other two

no matter what anyone says The Sunbelt is a better football conference than CUSA right now (and probably baseball too) so it would not be a great move for any program

and I do not know what the exit fees are for The Sunbelt or MAC, but they are over $5 million (closer to $7) for the CUSA

https://www.herald-dispatch.com/sports/m...7762a.html

there is no money difference between the two conferences to make it worth even a $1 million exit fee to switch and especially for a team from The Sunbelt to CUSA if CUSA lost their best team.....the CUSA would be much less appealing at that point

perhaps if the exit fee was under $1 million or right at $1 million a team might move because they are dumb enough to buy into the "play with teams in our state or region" argument that is generally a failure

I think that is just another reason that the MAC, CUSA and The Sunbelt will not worry about voting against a waiver based on "oh nooz we might lose a team"......I think most of them would welcome the loss of a team especially if it came with a couple of million dollars or more

and I don't think the MWC feels the pressure at all about losing a team and they will be very concerned with helping the AAC get a better CCG match up

The MAC makes more and there is less travel (for the logical additions). CUSA is more prestigious and has less travel for any of the eastern Sun Belt teams. And Texas St. would unquestionably leave to join the rest of the Texas schools.

The Sun Belt was better in football this past season, but was absolutely dismal in the 2 or 3 seasons prior. So it remains to be seen where they stand. I suspect over a 10 year period (now that the Sun Belt has fully absorbed its new additions) you would find the 3 conferences fairly even.
07-03-2019 03:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,942
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 139
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #112
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-03-2019 03:20 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:14 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 10:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:22 AM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 11:12 AM)ken d Wrote:  Except that they already have 10 members. The 10th one probably wouldn't be happy.

the discussion was about what The Sunbelt would do if they lost a team and specifically with NMSU and Liberty available

Yes. The assumption was that the AAC picks a 12th team from MAC or CUSA. Then the MAC backfills from CUSA or SunBelt and/or the CUSA backfills from SunBelt. Ultimately, its the Sun Belt that loses a team.

at this point I am not sure the MAC or CUSA or Sunbelt could pull a team from any of the other two

no matter what anyone says The Sunbelt is a better football conference than CUSA right now (and probably baseball too) so it would not be a great move for any program

and I do not know what the exit fees are for The Sunbelt or MAC, but they are over $5 million (closer to $7) for the CUSA

https://www.herald-dispatch.com/sports/m...7762a.html

there is no money difference between the two conferences to make it worth even a $1 million exit fee to switch and especially for a team from The Sunbelt to CUSA if CUSA lost their best team.....the CUSA would be much less appealing at that point

perhaps if the exit fee was under $1 million or right at $1 million a team might move because they are dumb enough to buy into the "play with teams in our state or region" argument that is generally a failure

I think that is just another reason that the MAC, CUSA and The Sunbelt will not worry about voting against a waiver based on "oh nooz we might lose a team"......I think most of them would welcome the loss of a team especially if it came with a couple of million dollars or more

and I don't think the MWC feels the pressure at all about losing a team and they will be very concerned with helping the AAC get a better CCG match up

The MAC makes more and there is less travel (for the logical additions). CUSA is more prestigious and has less travel for any of the eastern Sun Belt teams. And Texas St. would unquestionably leave to join the rest of the Texas schools.

The Sun Belt was better in football this past season, but was absolutely dismal in the 2 or 3 seasons prior. So it remains to be seen where they stand. I suspect over a 10 year period (now that the Sun Belt has fully absorbed its new additions) you would find the 3 conferences fairly even.

Remember, CUSA raided Sun Belt like AAC raided the CUSA. App St has not missed a bowl since their transition year. Arkansas St has always been consistent and good. Except for the year Ga Southern which was in transition, Ark St and App St have been willing to play anywhere and anyone. These two teams do not get the respect they deserve.
07-03-2019 04:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,464
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 479
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #113
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-02-2019 05:48 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  
(07-02-2019 12:13 PM)ken d Wrote:  It took me less than an hour each to produce 2020 and 2021 schedules for UConn that gave them 6 home games with only one FCS opponent. They won't have any trouble getting a decent schedule.
Can you show us the example-schedules you came up with?

I wish I could figure out how to create a link between threads. This is a copy of what I wrote on posts #32 and #37 on the thread titled "What is the absolute minimum UConn has to do with their 2020 schedule by FBS rules".



In 2020, Florida hosts New Mexico State on 11/21. NMSU has an open date on 11/28. Florida could host UConn instead, and NMSU go travel to UConn on the 28th. Looking at which FBS schools have an open OOC date to fill in 2020, I came up with the following potential schedule for UConn.

Those three G5 away games could be the first of a home and home series with the return games giving a head start to future schedules for UConn.

8/29 @ Louisiana
9/5 @ Coastal Carolina
9/12 @ Illinois
9/19 Maine
9/26 Indiana
10/3 @ SMU
10/10 Bye
10/17 @ Syracuse
10/24 Bye
10/31 Liberty
11/7 Army
11/14 Bye
11/21 @ Florida
11/28 New Mexico State
12/5 Massachusetts

That gives them 6 home and 6 away, with only one FCS game. They would have 4 P5 opponents (1 home, 3 away), 3 G5s (all away), 4 Indies (all home) and 1 FCS (home). If they couldn't get a waiver to play Louisiana in Week Zero they could potentially move that to 10/10 or play host to a second FCS opponent.

I bet they could live with that schedule.

Using similar strategies for 2021 as I used for 2020, I came up with this potential schedule for UConn.

9/2 Holy Cross
9/11 Purdue
9/18 @ Wake Forest
9/25 Miami (FL)
10/2 @ East Carolina
10/9 @ UMass
10/16 Bye
10/23 @ New Mexico State
10/20 UMass
11/6 Army
11/13 @ Clemson
11/20 Louisiana
11/27 Bye
12/4 @ Liberty

Note I have UMass and UConn playing each other home and home. In 2021 UMass currently only has 10 games scheduled, 6 of which are home games. They could give UConn its sixth home game in this way.
07-03-2019 05:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Native Georgian Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 21,765
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 561
I Root For: TULANE+GA.STATE
Location: Decatur GA
Post: #114
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
@ken d, thanks for the reply.

Do you have any doubt that SMU and ECU would be willing to host UConn in 20/21? I suppose if there was no money changing hands.
07-03-2019 05:52 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 10,464
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 479
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #115
RE: aac-commissioner-discusses-his-leagues-football-future
(07-03-2019 05:52 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  @ken d, thanks for the reply.

Do you have any doubt that SMU and ECU would be willing to host UConn in 20/21? I suppose if there was no money changing hands.

IIRC, without doing the research again, those schools already had those dates open and needed a 12th game. They weren't the only ones, but I don't see why they wouldn't want another home game with no strings attached.
07-03-2019 07:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2019 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, © 2002-2019 MyBB Group.