(07-09-2019 01:39 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 01:08 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 12:44 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 12:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 12:34 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Just so we are all clear, there will be no negotiations like some have suggested here. ESPN will tell them what they are willing to do and the AAC will do just that. If ESPN wants a certain team that team will be added, if ESPN wants 7 million back and make the AAC stay at 11 then they will do that. The AAC has no say over what will happen. ESPN holds all the cards.

Nah. It’s not quite that bad. More like ESPN will explain their position and give the AAC several options ESPN finds acceptable. It’s not like ESPN is going to say add Liberty or else and the AAC will instantly add the school. It’s more nuanced than that.

Yes, but the point was that whatever gets decided will be what ESPN has decided is best for them. The AAC wont stay at 11 if ESPN doesn't want them to. Like those saying BYU, Army or stay at 11. Well thats not really an option. If ESPN wants them at 12 and those 2 don't want to join then the AAC will still go to 12.

We are really just getting into semantics here. ESPN can not force the AAC to add a team that makes the league less valuable, just the same as the AAC can not force ESPN to pay them the exact same for adding a team they don't value. The only thing anyone reasonable on the subject is saying is that the only teams that ESPN is likely to value high enough to be worth adding probably won't say yes. Do you think ESPN wants to pay on average roughly 7 million dollars a year for insert MAC/Sun Belt/C-USA team or just pro rate the deal down for the loss of a member? I mean if I'm wrong and ESPN just wants a 12th bad enough to keep the deal they same if they add anyone then you'd be hearing an announcement very quickly.

They can lower it to the point that everyone makes less money as well if AAC plays hardball. I've seen first hand what happens if you don't do what ESPN wants. Trust me you don't win. ESPN OWNS 100% of the AAC's TV contract where most of their money comes from. Now the old deal had a clause that the contract could be renegotiated if certain teams leave. If i'm not mistaken UConn was one of them. If they still kept that clause in place like I assume they would ESPN could say now that the Huskies are gone you're all only worth 6 million each a year or we are going to take away more nationally televised games because those were with UConn in mind. Thats on top of all the issues they will now have with only 11 members and no CCG which ESPN also paid for. The AAC could probably get a waiver to hold one for a year or two to get their membership straightened out but they wont be able to just sit at 11 forever and have a CCG unless the rules are changed and all attempts at changing those rules by P5 conferences like the ACC have failed.

From everything, it sounds like they have a clause that would allow for "fair renegotiation." That's not the same thing as being able to cancel the deal or say we are now arbitrarily offering whatever amount and you have to take it. I am sure if there is not a fair solution reached between the parties that there are clauses for some sort of mediation/arbitration of the dispute. This is not to say I think the AAC is going to ignore what ESPN wants. I suspect that within reason the AAC is going to do whatever ESPN wants regarding another member, but I also suspect neither side wants to just add whatever MAC/Sun Belt/C-USA school just for the heck of it.

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and of course zero value in football.

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and zero value in football.

Define marginal. They were in the tournament in 2004, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2019. If they have marginal value then the rest of the conference is in real trouble As for football, we didnt really lose any value there--its basketball where we have some repair work to do. Just adding a warm body to the football side to attain an even number is short sighted and unwise.

(07-09-2019 01:55 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 12:59 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 11:01 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 09:20 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 09:10 AM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  It’s not what you want. It’s what ESPN wants. The AAC will add what ESPN tells them to add. Just ask the ACC.

They will, but does ESPN want to go from paying for every bit of Buffalo's content at the MAC price to paying the AAC price for it? Buffalo probably makes as much if not the most sense of any likely yes candidates, except for the fact that ESPN already owns 100% of their content for very little. What does ESPN gain by changing the patches on their jersey and paying multiple millions more a year to do it? Everyone keeps taking the statement of "there's a very short list of teams the AAC will add" as saying that's fully the AAC's decision. What I suspect is the actual truth is there's a very short list of teams that ESPN feel is worth the AAC adding.

Conferences have made moves like this in the past, and ESPN has approved despite the monetary point you mentioned.

Not saying that Buffalo is "the one", but you could have just as easily said the following a few years ago:

"They will, but does ESPN want to go from paying for every bit of Buffalo's Louisville's content at the MAC AAC price to paying the AAC ACC price for it? Buffalo Louisville probably makes as much if not the most sense of any likely yes candidates, except for the fact that ESPN already owns 100% of their content for very little. What does ESPN gain by changing the patches on their jersey and paying multiple millions more a year to do it?"

That is true, but that one also provided them the benefit of crippling a league who's TV deal was expiring and was hoping to get a brand new deal on the open market. Taking Louisville (along with the rest of the Big East defections to the ACC) did make them have to pay more for Louisville, but they also valued Louisville very highly and allowed them to be able to pay the remainder of the Big East/new AAC essentially nothing. So I'd say financially paying Louisville $25 million a year (or whatever the exact number was just guessing) but getting the entire AAC for like $25 million a year was probably on the whole a financial savings for them as well as prevented them from potentially losing content they valued to another network. They own the MAC and the AAC for I believe all of the 2020's (or at least close I don't know the exact end date of the MAC's deal). The content isn't going anywhere unlike the Big East/American that wanted to shop on the open market. What would be a comparable situation to moving Louisville to the ACC would be if ESPN facilitated a move of a MWC team to the AAC. The MWC deal is expiring and there's some grumblings they want to leave ESPN. If they wanted to make it worth it to the AAC to take whatever properties they value from the MWC that would follow the playbook perfectly. The Buffalo to the AAC situation is much more like the everyone whoring themselves to the B12 a while back. ESPN could have made it worth it to the B12 to add teams, but they owned all the properties that would say yes for pennies on the dollar and instead just figured out a way to get the B12 to stay where they were.

You think the ACC added Louisville because ESPN wanted to spite the AAC.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.

No, I think the ACC added Louisville because that's who ESPN told the ACC they valued the most, and from a strategic standpoint it also happened to greatly devalue a league who's deal was expiring and wanted to explore other options. So basically they got to obtain all the same amount of content, while yes paying Louisville more, but an AAC with Louisville likely would have been worth considerably more on the open market than the 2 million a year the AAC got in their first deal. They would have stood a decent chance to completely lose all of Louisville's content had they remained in the AAC. So they probably saved money overall while retaining all the content. That's the ESPN game plan, not paying more for content they already own. They own the MAC and the AAC for like a decade. They already own all of Buffalo's content for like 1 million a year or so give or take. What strategic gain do they really have to pay 7 million a year or so give or take to put the AAC patch on Buffalo's jersey?

(07-09-2019 05:18 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and zero value in football.

Define marginal. They were in the tournament in 2004, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2019. If they have marginal value then the rest of the conference is in real trouble As for football, we didnt really lose any value there--its basketball where we have some repair work to do.

VCU has a good basketball program. If the aim of a #12 is to get a good performer on the court, then VCU is a good addition. To the surprise of many, they were able to maintain a tournament-level team after Smart left.

But that's not what pays $7 million. That pay is for brand value and VCU has extremely little - when most fans think of VCU, they think of the Final 4 run, which is now a solid 8 years old, and fading. Probably because since Smart left, their modus has been to make the tournament and then lose in the first round.

IMO, since football drives the bus, a #12 has to have some strength or brand value in football. One or the other. VCU has neither.

(07-09-2019 05:25 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 05:18 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and zero value in football.

Define marginal. They were in the tournament in 2004, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2019. If they have marginal value then the rest of the conference is in real trouble As for football, we didnt really lose any value there--its basketball where we have some repair work to do.

VCU has a good basketball program. If the aim of a #12 is to get a good performer on the court, then VCU is a good addition. To the surprise of many, they were able to maintain a tournament-level team after Smart left.

But that's not what pays $7 million. That pay is for brand value and VCU has extremely little - when most fans think of VCU, they think of the Final 4 run, which is now a solid 8 years old, and fading. Probably because since Smart left, their modus has been to make the tournament and then lose in the first round.

IMO, since football drives the bus, a #12 has to have some strength or brand value in football. One or the other. VCU has neither.

I dont disagree. There appears to be no such addition available to the AAC. So, fix what you can and move forward with 11. Let ESPN dock the AAC for the 5 million in football value. I doubt waiting will help much. If someone was going to emerge as a permanent leader of the furr ball of current choices they would have already done it. My guess is the field would look little different in 3 years than it does now. The only thing you'd really be hoping for is maybe a BYU, Army, or a MW team might be more interested at that point. Given the landscape---fix basketball and move on with 11 for FB. Nothing else really makes sense.

(07-09-2019 05:22 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 01:55 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 12:59 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 11:01 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 09:20 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  They will, but does ESPN want to go from paying for every bit of Buffalo's content at the MAC price to paying the AAC price for it? Buffalo probably makes as much if not the most sense of any likely yes candidates, except for the fact that ESPN already owns 100% of their content for very little. What does ESPN gain by changing the patches on their jersey and paying multiple millions more a year to do it? Everyone keeps taking the statement of "there's a very short list of teams the AAC will add" as saying that's fully the AAC's decision. What I suspect is the actual truth is there's a very short list of teams that ESPN feel is worth the AAC adding.

Conferences have made moves like this in the past, and ESPN has approved despite the monetary point you mentioned.

Not saying that Buffalo is "the one", but you could have just as easily said the following a few years ago:

"They will, but does ESPN want to go from paying for every bit of Buffalo's Louisville's content at the MAC AAC price to paying the AAC ACC price for it? Buffalo Louisville probably makes as much if not the most sense of any likely yes candidates, except for the fact that ESPN already owns 100% of their content for very little. What does ESPN gain by changing the patches on their jersey and paying multiple millions more a year to do it?"

That is true, but that one also provided them the benefit of crippling a league who's TV deal was expiring and was hoping to get a brand new deal on the open market. Taking Louisville (along with the rest of the Big East defections to the ACC) did make them have to pay more for Louisville, but they also valued Louisville very highly and allowed them to be able to pay the remainder of the Big East/new AAC essentially nothing. So I'd say financially paying Louisville $25 million a year (or whatever the exact number was just guessing) but getting the entire AAC for like $25 million a year was probably on the whole a financial savings for them as well as prevented them from potentially losing content they valued to another network. They own the MAC and the AAC for I believe all of the 2020's (or at least close I don't know the exact end date of the MAC's deal). The content isn't going anywhere unlike the Big East/American that wanted to shop on the open market. What would be a comparable situation to moving Louisville to the ACC would be if ESPN facilitated a move of a MWC team to the AAC. The MWC deal is expiring and there's some grumblings they want to leave ESPN. If they wanted to make it worth it to the AAC to take whatever properties they value from the MWC that would follow the playbook perfectly. The Buffalo to the AAC situation is much more like the everyone whoring themselves to the B12 a while back. ESPN could have made it worth it to the B12 to add teams, but they owned all the properties that would say yes for pennies on the dollar and instead just figured out a way to get the B12 to stay where they were.

You think the ACC added Louisville because ESPN wanted to spite the AAC.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.

No, I think the ACC added Louisville because that's who ESPN told the ACC they valued the most, and from a strategic standpoint it also happened to greatly devalue a league who's deal was expiring and wanted to explore other options. So basically they got to obtain all the same amount of content, while yes paying Louisville more, but an AAC with Louisville likely would have been worth considerably more on the open market than the 2 million a year the AAC got in their first deal. They would have stood a decent chance to completely lose all of Louisville's content had they remained in the AAC. So they probably saved money overall while retaining all the content. That's the ESPN game plan, not paying more for content they already own. They own the MAC and the AAC for like a decade. They already own all of Buffalo's content for like 1 million a year or so give or take. What strategic gain do they really have to pay 7 million a year or so give or take to put the AAC patch on Buffalo's jersey?

Nope. The ACC added Louisville over UConn because Florida and Clemson wanted a solid football school---and if they didnt get it---there was a very real concern among the membership that they might leave.

If the NCAA and/or ESPN throws a fuss over 11 teams maybe ESPN can facilitate a swap:

The AAC adds Buffalo for all sports
The MAC adds UConn as a fb affiliate (and goes to a 20 game double round robin in basketball)

(07-09-2019 09:25 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  The conference will stay at 11 unless a BYU or Army decide to join the conference.

^This^ though I might make an exception for Colorado State. Most likely stay at 11 until the Big 12 does its thing. Then the 12th will be added. The value of the candidate schools will be re-assessed @2024-25.

(07-09-2019 03:20 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 12:41 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 12:34 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Just so we are all clear, there will be no negotiations like some have suggested here. ESPN will tell them what they are willing to do and the AAC will do just that. If ESPN wants a certain team that team will be added, if ESPN wants 7 million back and make the AAC stay at 11 then they will do that. The AAC has no say over what will happen. ESPN holds all the cards.

Nah. It’s not quite that bad. More like ESPN will explain their position and give the AAC several options ESPN finds acceptable. It’s not like ESPN is going to say add Liberty or else and the AAC will instantly add the school. It’s more nuanced than that.

More like they will both come up with lists and see what matches but neither side is trying to slap the other in the face here. It's a bit like a union corporation negotiation when some major unforeseen economic change occurs. Both have different views but will try and find a solution everyone can deal with, since its beneficial for both sides to feel good about the outcome and avoid major fights.

No it's not a thing like that at all. ESPN owns their TV content hence they hold all the cards. The AAC has zero leverage in any negotiations moving forward. ESPN has slapped the AAC in the face before and has slapped many others in the face as well. If the AAC wants to sit at 11 and ESPN wants them at 12 for their CCG they will go to 12 or face some serious repercussions. Selection of bowls becomes worse, less coverage, bad mouthing more so than before, burying games and yes they can lower the amount each team gets and the amount of nationally televised games. They can claim UConn was worth a big part of the TV deal and lower the amount per year.

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and of course zero value in football.

The thing to remember about BBall only schools to the AAC is that those schools would leave for the Big East in a NY minute if they get too good.

(07-09-2019 03:20 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  [ESPN and AAC] will both come up with lists and see what matches but neither side is trying to slap the other in the face here. It's a bit like a union corporation negotiation when some major unforeseen economic change occurs. Both have different views but will try and find a solution everyone can deal with, since its beneficial for both sides to feel good about the outcome and avoid major fights.

I agree with that.

(07-09-2019 06:14 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and of course zero value in football.

The thing to remember about BBall only schools to the AAC is that those schools would leave for the Big East in a NY minute if they get too good.

The thing is--what the Big East is most about is tradition. They like playing everyone in a round robin home and home. Id say it very likely they are done building their conference unless someone leaves. What I think is coming is a rush for all the decent basketball programs in smaller conferences to start coalescing together in order to generate a solid conference SOS. If the AAC was smart--they'd grab the best 2 or 3 basketball programs in their footprint right now as non-football members. Be nice if the AAC could get ahead of the curve for once.

(07-09-2019 06:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 06:14 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and of course zero value in football.

The thing to remember about BBall only schools to the AAC is that those schools would leave for the Big East in a NY minute if they get too good.

The thing is--what the Big East is most about is tradition. They like playing everyone in a round robin home and home. Id say it very likely they are done building their conference unless someone leaves. What I think is coming is a rush for all the decent basketball programs in smaller conferences to start coalescing together in order to generate a solid conference SOS. If the AAC was smart--they'd grab the best 2 or 3 basketball programs in their footprint right now as non-football members. Be nice if the AAC could get ahead of the curve for once.

Well the point was though if the Big East ever felt the need to expand they could raid those bball programs from the AAC because in the eyes of non football playing basketball schools the Big East is the top conference to be in.

(07-09-2019 06:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 06:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 06:14 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Here is the thing----among schools that would have an interest in the AAC---where is the school with such a massive brand, athletic success, and obvious TV value that would push the presidents to completely dismiss academics as a factor? I dont really see a Boise or Louisville type option for the AAC. The only posisble addition that obviously works on all levels (brand, athletic performance, TV value, and academics) is VCU.

I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and of course zero value in football.

The thing to remember about BBall only schools to the AAC is that those schools would leave for the Big East in a NY minute if they get too good.

The thing is--what the Big East is most about is tradition. They like playing everyone in a round robin home and home. Id say it very likely they are done building their conference unless someone leaves. What I think is coming is a rush for all the decent basketball programs in smaller conferences to start coalescing together in order to generate a solid conference SOS. If the AAC was smart--they'd grab the best 2 or 3 basketball programs in their footprint right now as non-football members. Be nice if the AAC could get ahead of the curve for once.

Well the point was though if the Big East ever felt the need to expand they could raid those bball programs from the AAC because in the eyes of non football playing basketball schools the Big East is the top conference to be in.

But its a point that really has no bearing regarding how the AAC should build its conference. I mean---thats no different than football, right? So---no need adding a 12th football school because if they get too good they will just get poached by a P5? Of course thats not the attitude any conference can afford to have. You build the best collection of teams possible. If one gets poached--you take the next best and move on. The function is to build the best conference you can based on the criteria the league values. At least in basketball, the AAC could potentially surpass the Big East in basketball one day---that could never happen under the current college landscape in football.

(07-09-2019 07:06 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 06:45 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 06:38 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 06:14 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 05:14 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  I do not see VCU as a good fit at all. They have marginal value in basketball, and of course zero value in football.

The thing to remember about BBall only schools to the AAC is that those schools would leave for the Big East in a NY minute if they get too good.

The thing is--what the Big East is most about is tradition. They like playing everyone in a round robin home and home. Id say it very likely they are done building their conference unless someone leaves. What I think is coming is a rush for all the decent basketball programs in smaller conferences to start coalescing together in order to generate a solid conference SOS. If the AAC was smart--they'd grab the best 2 or 3 basketball programs in their footprint right now as non-football members. Be nice if the AAC could get ahead of the curve for once.

Well the point was though if the Big East ever felt the need to expand they could raid those bball programs from the AAC because in the eyes of non football playing basketball schools the Big East is the top conference to be in.

But its a point that really has no bearing regarding how the AAC should build its conference. I mean---thats no different than football, right? So---no need adding a 12th football school because if they get too good they will just get poached by a P5? Of course thats not the attitude any conference can afford to have. You build the best collection of teams possible. If one gets poached--you take the next best and move on. The function is to build the best conference you can based on the criteria the league values. At least in basketball, the AAC could potentially surpass the Big East in basketball one day---that could never happen under the current college landscape in football.

You continue to offer clear-headed and insightful thoughts on this topic, A-Coog. I'm with you fully. The AAC has no realistic "grand slam" add in football. As such, it probably can't improve in that sport with any addition (notwithstanding adding Army or BYU, which is probably no more likely than a lovely lass ever mistakenly confusing me with handsome George Clooney or Brad Pitt). But if — and this is a long-shot, I admit — the league could add the trio of Dayton, St. Louis and VCU ... that's a very nice upgrade to the hoops side of the league. Alas, I don't see it happening.

But even a solo add of VCU ... I would be quite pleased with that. That's a solid double (if not a triple).

And given that I also follow the Big East, I would be fine with the BE adding St. Louis to go to 12.

Quote:As of right now, UB has no plans to leave the MAC. UB athletic director Mark Alnutt declined an interview request to discuss the topic, but issued a statement to the News through the UB athletic department.

"The University at Buffalo is a proud member of the Mid-American Conference,” Alnutt said in the statement. “We will continue to pursue leadership in the conference as we elevate the national profile of our program.”

https://buffalonews.com/2019/07/08/ub-bu...news-2019/

Classic denial.

Congrats Bulls...

(07-09-2019 12:22 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(07-09-2019 11:57 AM)zoocrew Wrote:  I still think it’s going to be a MWC team and we’re going to be told “tough nuts, you’re going to the East”.

Temple
Cincinnati
Navy
ECU
USF
UCF

is what literally every team in the East division wants to happen.

Memphis can be easily pushed to the east and has an old rival in Cincy sitting there. I don't think any of the front range schools split off from the other 2 and leave the MWC for the AAC. After that everyone else in the MWC is just to far away.

I'm surprised UNM never comes up in these discussions. It's the closest MWC school to most of the AAC west schools, a state flagship, a top-tier research university with 26K students and a $453 million endowment (the MWC's second largest), and it pretty much owns the New Mexico market outside of Las Cruces. Yes the Lobos were down in football in 2018 but in the five previous years they went to two bowls and drew over 20,000 per game each season. And of course they have a great basketball tradition and strong fan support in The Pit where home attendance has averaged over 10,000 pretty much forever.

My perception is that UNM isn't tied at the hip to Wyoming, Colorado State and Air Force in quite the way those three schools are tied to each other. If the AAC offered I could see UNM accepting.

New Mexico doesn't have the population or the recruiting base to excited about.

Nor a local TV market ala UNLV.

(07-09-2019 07:46 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

Quote:As of right now, UB has no plans to leave the MAC. UB athletic director Mark Alnutt declined an interview request to discuss the topic, but issued a statement to the News through the UB athletic department.

"The University at Buffalo is a proud member of the Mid-American Conference,” Alnutt said in the statement. “We will continue to pursue leadership in the conference as we elevate the national profile of our program.”

https://buffalonews.com/2019/07/08/ub-bu...news-2019/

Classic denial.

Congrats Bulls...

Basically the exact statement UConn gave before they left