(12-19-2019 11:13 AM)First Mate Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 08:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 06:04 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 12:15 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 11:46 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Yes, but those IFs were not part of the post I was replying to. Football only would still be around $200,000 when factoring in the shipping of all equipment and travel/lodging for 120 people across the country. Honestly though, I would want to add SDSU in for basketball too...they are a genuinely good basketball product, and that would completely delegitimize the MWC in that sport if they left.

Basketball doesn't matter in this instance. Like, The MAC was the 9th best conference last year, the MWC was the 15th. But MAC ain't gettin' no where near the money the MWC gets. It's football, football, football.

Which is why a football only add is basically all you need. You can stay with 11 in basketball and when everyone moves to 20 conference games you can do a round robin with 11.

Playing devils advocate against this conventional wisdom-----I'd argue that adding a strong basketball school is more needed than adding a 12th football team. The exit of UConn DOES clearly weaken the overall strength of AAC basketball---where as getting rid of the weakest and most unsuccessful football program in the AAC (UConn) actually improves the overall quality of AAC football. Thus, adding a quality basketball school like VCU would be an excellent way of recovering most of what the league lost in UConn. On the other hand---Its not really necessary to replace UConn football unless a clear and obvious value adding program presents itself. The football league is improved simply by no longer being saddled with its worst team.

From the get-go I’ve said adding Army, AF, or BYU football only (any one of the three) and VCU bball only is the only course of action.

Any other plan or school does nothing to elevate the AAC. Aresco, TV, and the presidents know this

I would counter that if AF were such a valuable brand to the marketplace they would have elevated the profile of the MW as much as Boise, and they haven't. The only brand worth having in that conference, but not really, is Boise, and they aren't going to add any $ to the AAC's bottom line either. If Boise were so valuable their separate ESPN deal would be worth at least as much as the AAC deal and it isn't.

Same argument against Army as the two above. I don't see how they enhance the league in any really meaningful way.

IMHO BYU is the only brand left on the board that brings any cachet and they would only at least keep the media contracts stable.

I have no preference for basketball because I'm not really a fan so if it's VCU then OK. At least their institutional profile is similar to the publics in the AAC.

ECU needs to start carrying our water in the league too because we are cashing welfare checks and that ain't SAT.

There are always going to be teams who have much higher and much lower value. The top value in the MWC is Air Force and Boise St. AF had some of the best viewed games in the MWC.... which isnt saying much because their timeslots suck and they are typically on a crap channel, but Boise States arent much better and normally their most viewed is against a P5 opponent.

Its been said by so many analysts that the only real options for the AAC is BYU, BSU, Air Force and Army. Across the board, those are the well know and accepted options. BYU isnt coming. They have set their schedule and show no interest at all. Army has declined and have openly said they like where they are and do not want to be in a conference.

That leave BSU and AF. With all things being equal, I think AF is the best choice. Less travel, easier to get to, its actually in the geographic footprint and could be an all sports member because its close enough. They are competitive and fit the "American" branding.... and they arent BSU. No attitude to deal with.

If we expand, I gurantee they will be at the top of the wish list, and if they dont want to make a move then I doubt we expand. CSU has an interesting case and has a lot of upside, but their viewership numbers make it hard to justify the addition.... but I do think they have some of the most potential along with SDSU (but they come with their own set of problems)

(12-19-2019 12:21 PM)PuddlePirate Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 11:13 AM)First Mate Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 08:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 06:04 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 12:15 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  Basketball doesn't matter in this instance. Like, The MAC was the 9th best conference last year, the MWC was the 15th. But MAC ain't gettin' no where near the money the MWC gets. It's football, football, football.

Which is why a football only add is basically all you need. You can stay with 11 in basketball and when everyone moves to 20 conference games you can do a round robin with 11.

Playing devils advocate against this conventional wisdom-----I'd argue that adding a strong basketball school is more needed than adding a 12th football team. The exit of UConn DOES clearly weaken the overall strength of AAC basketball---where as getting rid of the weakest and most unsuccessful football program in the AAC (UConn) actually improves the overall quality of AAC football. Thus, adding a quality basketball school like VCU would be an excellent way of recovering most of what the league lost in UConn. On the other hand---Its not really necessary to replace UConn football unless a clear and obvious value adding program presents itself. The football league is improved simply by no longer being saddled with its worst team.

From the get-go I’ve said adding Army, AF, or BYU football only (any one of the three) and VCU bball only is the only course of action.

Any other plan or school does nothing to elevate the AAC. Aresco, TV, and the presidents know this

I would counter that if AF were such a valuable brand to the marketplace they would have elevated the profile of the MW as much as Boise, and they haven't. The only brand worth having in that conference, but not really, is Boise, and they aren't going to add any $ to the AAC's bottom line either. If Boise were so valuable their separate ESPN deal would be worth at least as much as the AAC deal and it isn't.

Same argument against Army as the two above. I don't see how they enhance the league in any really meaningful way.

IMHO BYU is the only brand left on the board that brings any cachet and they would only at least keep the media contracts stable.

I have no preference for basketball because I'm not really a fan so if it's VCU then OK. At least their institutional profile is similar to the publics in the AAC.

ECU needs to start carrying our water in the league too because we are cashing welfare checks and that ain't SAT.

The problem with that argument is that its provably incorrect. If TCU was so valuable then the MW would have been earning more---yet TCU got 20 million when they moved to the Big12. Same thing for Utah...if they weren't worth more than 1.5 million a year in the MW---then why is the Pac12 paying them 20 million? Same thing for Louisville---who went from making 2 million in the AAC to suddenly making 20 million in the ACC. Rutgers made even more than Louisville when they left the their 2 million dollar pay check in the AAC behind. Even your BYU example reflects the error of your thinking---BYU only made 1 million in the MW---but when they left and went indy----ESPN said they were worth somewhere around 4-5 million.

Air Force is a fit for the AAC for several reasons. One, they have a national fan base that is similar to Navy's. Two---like Navy, the fit with the "American" name and give the AAC a recognizable identity as the home 2 of the 3 academies. Three---they are a "football only" addition, making their somewhat distant location less of an issue. Four---as a "football only" addition, they provide a quality football program without adversely affecting the leagues basketball performance (unlike most other options for the AAC like AppySt or S Miss, etc). Fifth---the Air Force Academy represents an academic "fit" as well as athletic "fit".

(12-19-2019 01:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 12:21 PM)PuddlePirate Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 11:13 AM)First Mate Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 08:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 06:04 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  Which is why a football only add is basically all you need. You can stay with 11 in basketball and when everyone moves to 20 conference games you can do a round robin with 11.

Playing devils advocate against this conventional wisdom-----I'd argue that adding a strong basketball school is more needed than adding a 12th football team. The exit of UConn DOES clearly weaken the overall strength of AAC basketball---where as getting rid of the weakest and most unsuccessful football program in the AAC (UConn) actually improves the overall quality of AAC football. Thus, adding a quality basketball school like VCU would be an excellent way of recovering most of what the league lost in UConn. On the other hand---Its not really necessary to replace UConn football unless a clear and obvious value adding program presents itself. The football league is improved simply by no longer being saddled with its worst team.

From the get-go I’ve said adding Army, AF, or BYU football only (any one of the three) and VCU bball only is the only course of action.

Any other plan or school does nothing to elevate the AAC. Aresco, TV, and the presidents know this

I would counter that if AF were such a valuable brand to the marketplace they would have elevated the profile of the MW as much as Boise, and they haven't. The only brand worth having in that conference, but not really, is Boise, and they aren't going to add any $ to the AAC's bottom line either. If Boise were so valuable their separate ESPN deal would be worth at least as much as the AAC deal and it isn't.

Same argument against Army as the two above. I don't see how they enhance the league in any really meaningful way.

IMHO BYU is the only brand left on the board that brings any cachet and they would only at least keep the media contracts stable.

I have no preference for basketball because I'm not really a fan so if it's VCU then OK. At least their institutional profile is similar to the publics in the AAC.

ECU needs to start carrying our water in the league too because we are cashing welfare checks and that ain't SAT.

The problem with that argument is that its provably incorrect. If TCU was so valuable then the MW would have been earning more---yet TCU got 20 million when they moved to the Big12. Same thing for Utah...if they weren't worth more than 1.5 million a year in the MW---then why is the Pac12 paying them 20 million? Same thing for Louisville---who went from making 2 million in the AAC to suddenly making 20 million in the ACC. Rutgers made even more than Louisville when they left the their 2 million dollar pay check in the AAC behind. Even your BYU example reflects the error of your thinking---BYU only made 1 million in the MW---but when they left and went indy----ESPN said they were worth somewhere around 4-5 million.

Air Force is a fit for the AAC for several reasons. One, they have a national fan base that is similar to Navy's. Two---like Navy, the fit with the "American" name and give the AAC a recognizable identity as the home 2 of the 3 academies. Three---they are a "football only" addition, making their somewhat distant location less of an issue. Four---as a "football only" addition, they provide a quality football program without adversely affecting the leagues basketball performance (unlike most other options for the AAC like AppySt or S Miss, etc). Fifth---the Air Force Academy represents an academic "fit" as well as athletic "fit".

TCU is in the B12 because the B12 were desperate. They needed to find a team, and then 2 to make sure they were not raided out of existence.

(12-19-2019 11:13 AM)First Mate Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 08:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 06:04 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 12:15 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 11:46 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Yes, but those IFs were not part of the post I was replying to. Football only would still be around $200,000 when factoring in the shipping of all equipment and travel/lodging for 120 people across the country. Honestly though, I would want to add SDSU in for basketball too...they are a genuinely good basketball product, and that would completely delegitimize the MWC in that sport if they left.

Basketball doesn't matter in this instance. Like, The MAC was the 9th best conference last year, the MWC was the 15th. But MAC ain't gettin' no where near the money the MWC gets. It's football, football, football.

Which is why a football only add is basically all you need. You can stay with 11 in basketball and when everyone moves to 20 conference games you can do a round robin with 11.

Playing devils advocate against this conventional wisdom-----I'd argue that adding a strong basketball school is more needed than adding a 12th football team. The exit of UConn DOES clearly weaken the overall strength of AAC basketball---where as getting rid of the weakest and most unsuccessful football program in the AAC (UConn) actually improves the overall quality of AAC football. Thus, adding a quality basketball school like VCU would be an excellent way of recovering most of what the league lost in UConn. On the other hand---Its not really necessary to replace UConn football unless a clear and obvious value adding program presents itself. The football league is improved simply by no longer being saddled with its worst team.

From the get-go I’ve said adding Army, AF, or BYU football only (any one of the three) and VCU bball only is the only course of action.

Any other plan or school does nothing to elevate the AAC. Aresco, TV, and the presidents know this

While I like the academies I feel like they have a cap and really shouldn't be added. I mean Army floundered for decades and if for some reason they lose their coach who is to say they don't revert back to the historical norm. I think BYU and the American help each other and would be the only one that offers the upside along with the national profile of the academies. To me BYU/VCU would be a homerun and actual improve the overall league with the exit of UConn. But I get BYU is resisting but in 2025 if the contracts change and it is an 8 team playoff and the league is able to be the defacto playoff participant that changes everything I think for them. So I guess we shall see.

AF moves no needles, their only possible attraction relates to Navy & the military - not reasons to add them. AF presents real travel issues... and they are yet another option team - no thanks.

(12-20-2019 09:01 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  AF moves no needles, their only possible attraction relates to Navy & the military - not reasons to add them. AF presents real travel issues... and they are yet another option team - no thanks.

You can say that, but it isnt backed by the numbers. AF has a higher viewership than just about any G5 and what the hell on the travel issues... They are a border state to Houston, SMU, Tulsa and Wichita. Seems thats some pretty easy travel. They are right in our footprint.

(12-19-2019 04:17 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 01:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 12:21 PM)PuddlePirate Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 11:13 AM)First Mate Wrote:  

(12-18-2019 08:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Playing devils advocate against this conventional wisdom-----I'd argue that adding a strong basketball school is more needed than adding a 12th football team. The exit of UConn DOES clearly weaken the overall strength of AAC basketball---where as getting rid of the weakest and most unsuccessful football program in the AAC (UConn) actually improves the overall quality of AAC football. Thus, adding a quality basketball school like VCU would be an excellent way of recovering most of what the league lost in UConn. On the other hand---Its not really necessary to replace UConn football unless a clear and obvious value adding program presents itself. The football league is improved simply by no longer being saddled with its worst team.

From the get-go I’ve said adding Army, AF, or BYU football only (any one of the three) and VCU bball only is the only course of action.

Any other plan or school does nothing to elevate the AAC. Aresco, TV, and the presidents know this

I would counter that if AF were such a valuable brand to the marketplace they would have elevated the profile of the MW as much as Boise, and they haven't. The only brand worth having in that conference, but not really, is Boise, and they aren't going to add any $ to the AAC's bottom line either. If Boise were so valuable their separate ESPN deal would be worth at least as much as the AAC deal and it isn't.

Same argument against Army as the two above. I don't see how they enhance the league in any really meaningful way.

IMHO BYU is the only brand left on the board that brings any cachet and they would only at least keep the media contracts stable.

I have no preference for basketball because I'm not really a fan so if it's VCU then OK. At least their institutional profile is similar to the publics in the AAC.

ECU needs to start carrying our water in the league too because we are cashing welfare checks and that ain't SAT.

The problem with that argument is that its provably incorrect. If TCU was so valuable then the MW would have been earning more---yet TCU got 20 million when they moved to the Big12. Same thing for Utah...if they weren't worth more than 1.5 million a year in the MW---then why is the Pac12 paying them 20 million? Same thing for Louisville---who went from making 2 million in the AAC to suddenly making 20 million in the ACC. Rutgers made even more than Louisville when they left the their 2 million dollar pay check in the AAC behind. Even your BYU example reflects the error of your thinking---BYU only made 1 million in the MW---but when they left and went indy----ESPN said they were worth somewhere around 4-5 million.

Air Force is a fit for the AAC for several reasons. One, they have a national fan base that is similar to Navy's. Two---like Navy, the fit with the "American" name and give the AAC a recognizable identity as the home 2 of the 3 academies. Three---they are a "football only" addition, making their somewhat distant location less of an issue. Four---as a "football only" addition, they provide a quality football program without adversely affecting the leagues basketball performance (unlike most other options for the AAC like AppySt or S Miss, etc). Fifth---the Air Force Academy represents an academic "fit" as well as athletic "fit".

TCU is in the B12 because the B12 were desperate. They needed to find a team, and then 2 to make sure they were not raided out of existence.

I would respectfully suggest that we are in the same situation, whether we realize it or not.

(12-20-2019 10:03 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 04:17 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 01:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 12:21 PM)PuddlePirate Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 11:13 AM)First Mate Wrote:  From the get-go I’ve said adding Army, AF, or BYU football only (any one of the three) and VCU bball only is the only course of action.

Any other plan or school does nothing to elevate the AAC. Aresco, TV, and the presidents know this

I would counter that if AF were such a valuable brand to the marketplace they would have elevated the profile of the MW as much as Boise, and they haven't. The only brand worth having in that conference, but not really, is Boise, and they aren't going to add any $ to the AAC's bottom line either. If Boise were so valuable their separate ESPN deal would be worth at least as much as the AAC deal and it isn't.

Same argument against Army as the two above. I don't see how they enhance the league in any really meaningful way.

IMHO BYU is the only brand left on the board that brings any cachet and they would only at least keep the media contracts stable.

I have no preference for basketball because I'm not really a fan so if it's VCU then OK. At least their institutional profile is similar to the publics in the AAC.

ECU needs to start carrying our water in the league too because we are cashing welfare checks and that ain't SAT.

The problem with that argument is that its provably incorrect. If TCU was so valuable then the MW would have been earning more---yet TCU got 20 million when they moved to the Big12. Same thing for Utah...if they weren't worth more than 1.5 million a year in the MW---then why is the Pac12 paying them 20 million? Same thing for Louisville---who went from making 2 million in the AAC to suddenly making 20 million in the ACC. Rutgers made even more than Louisville when they left the their 2 million dollar pay check in the AAC behind. Even your BYU example reflects the error of your thinking---BYU only made 1 million in the MW---but when they left and went indy----ESPN said they were worth somewhere around 4-5 million.

Air Force is a fit for the AAC for several reasons. One, they have a national fan base that is similar to Navy's. Two---like Navy, the fit with the "American" name and give the AAC a recognizable identity as the home 2 of the 3 academies. Three---they are a "football only" addition, making their somewhat distant location less of an issue. Four---as a "football only" addition, they provide a quality football program without adversely affecting the leagues basketball performance (unlike most other options for the AAC like AppySt or S Miss, etc). Fifth---the Air Force Academy represents an academic "fit" as well as athletic "fit".

TCU is in the B12 because the B12 were desperate. They needed to find a team, and then 2 to make sure they were not raided out of existence.

I would respectfully suggest that we are in the same situation, whether we realize it or not.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

We need to fight harder that the Big XII had to they were fighting for playoff access (CCG for access), we literaly fighting for survival, yes still fighting.

We need to be proactive. The Big 12 sat back and waited and they are doing it again. If the AAC wants to stay afloat, then they need to kill off the MWC. Make it the only G5 worth bidding on and add members strong enough to increase our viewership (Air Force) and SOS (Boise St)... BYU would be best for the last spot but it isnt happening. Though I think we should try to nail down those two, and then ask one last time if BYU wants to join.

Weve already shown that a 2 loss AAC is pretty much going to get the Acess bowl over a 1 loss from any other G5 team. If we bulk up our conference a bit more, then the seperation is so clear that its not worth even debating and we can push harder for recognition as a P conference in some form. (Something like Emerging P6... higher percentage of playoff and an AQ into playoff if they go to 8)

(12-20-2019 11:48 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 10:03 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 04:17 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 01:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 12:21 PM)PuddlePirate Wrote:  I would counter that if AF were such a valuable brand to the marketplace they would have elevated the profile of the MW as much as Boise, and they haven't. The only brand worth having in that conference, but not really, is Boise, and they aren't going to add any $ to the AAC's bottom line either. If Boise were so valuable their separate ESPN deal would be worth at least as much as the AAC deal and it isn't.

Same argument against Army as the two above. I don't see how they enhance the league in any really meaningful way.

IMHO BYU is the only brand left on the board that brings any cachet and they would only at least keep the media contracts stable.

I have no preference for basketball because I'm not really a fan so if it's VCU then OK. At least their institutional profile is similar to the publics in the AAC.

ECU needs to start carrying our water in the league too because we are cashing welfare checks and that ain't SAT.

The problem with that argument is that its provably incorrect. If TCU was so valuable then the MW would have been earning more---yet TCU got 20 million when they moved to the Big12. Same thing for Utah...if they weren't worth more than 1.5 million a year in the MW---then why is the Pac12 paying them 20 million? Same thing for Louisville---who went from making 2 million in the AAC to suddenly making 20 million in the ACC. Rutgers made even more than Louisville when they left the their 2 million dollar pay check in the AAC behind. Even your BYU example reflects the error of your thinking---BYU only made 1 million in the MW---but when they left and went indy----ESPN said they were worth somewhere around 4-5 million.

Air Force is a fit for the AAC for several reasons. One, they have a national fan base that is similar to Navy's. Two---like Navy, the fit with the "American" name and give the AAC a recognizable identity as the home 2 of the 3 academies. Three---they are a "football only" addition, making their somewhat distant location less of an issue. Four---as a "football only" addition, they provide a quality football program without adversely affecting the leagues basketball performance (unlike most other options for the AAC like AppySt or S Miss, etc). Fifth---the Air Force Academy represents an academic "fit" as well as athletic "fit".

TCU is in the B12 because the B12 were desperate. They needed to find a team, and then 2 to make sure they were not raided out of existence.

I would respectfully suggest that we are in the same situation, whether we realize it or not.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

We need to fight harder that the Big XII had to they were fighting for playoff access (CCG for access), we literaly fighting for survival, yes still fighting.

The B12 lost no money to existing members by adding TCU - in that sense we are in a very different situation.

(12-20-2019 12:34 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  We need to be proactive. The Big 12 sat back and waited and they are doing it again. If the AAC wants to stay afloat, then they need to kill off the MWC. Make it the only G5 worth bidding on and add members strong enough to increase our viewership (Air Force) and SOS (Boise St)... BYU would be best for the last spot but it isnt happening. Though I think we should try to nail down those two, and then ask one last time if BYU wants to join.

Weve already shown that a 2 loss AAC is pretty much going to get the Acess bowl over a 1 loss from any other G5 team. If we bulk up our conference a bit more, then the seperation is so clear that its not worth even debating and we can push harder for recognition as a P conference in some form. (Something like Emerging P6... higher percentage of playoff and an AQ into playoff if they go to 8)

This. Let's be ruthless and aggressive.

(12-20-2019 12:50 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 11:48 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 10:03 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 04:17 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 01:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

The B12 lost no money to existing members by adding TCU - in that sense we are in a very different situation.

We do not really know $$ wise in way. We are likely losing all or most of a share that UCONN received. ESPN may well give it back with on add, and if they are losing the MWC may even bite for 3. No one here really knows what the possible $$ situation is for the AAC. We are just guessing based on our gut feelings.

(12-20-2019 12:50 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 11:48 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 10:03 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 04:17 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 01:59 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The problem with that argument is that its provably incorrect. If TCU was so valuable then the MW would have been earning more---yet TCU got 20 million when they moved to the Big12. Same thing for Utah...if they weren't worth more than 1.5 million a year in the MW---then why is the Pac12 paying them 20 million? Same thing for Louisville---who went from making 2 million in the AAC to suddenly making 20 million in the ACC. Rutgers made even more than Louisville when they left the their 2 million dollar pay check in the AAC behind. Even your BYU example reflects the error of your thinking---BYU only made 1 million in the MW---but when they left and went indy----ESPN said they were worth somewhere around 4-5 million.

Air Force is a fit for the AAC for several reasons. One, they have a national fan base that is similar to Navy's. Two---like Navy, the fit with the "American" name and give the AAC a recognizable identity as the home 2 of the 3 academies. Three---they are a "football only" addition, making their somewhat distant location less of an issue. Four---as a "football only" addition, they provide a quality football program without adversely affecting the leagues basketball performance (unlike most other options for the AAC like AppySt or S Miss, etc). Fifth---the Air Force Academy represents an academic "fit" as well as athletic "fit".

TCU is in the B12 because the B12 were desperate. They needed to find a team, and then 2 to make sure they were not raided out of existence.

I would respectfully suggest that we are in the same situation, whether we realize it or not.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

We need to fight harder that the Big XII had to they were fighting for playoff access (CCG for access), we literaly fighting for survival, yes still fighting.

The B12 lost no money to existing members by adding TCU - in that sense we are in a very different situation.

Other than most (Army/VCU) of the possible additions east of the Mississippi, the additions out west will not cost the AAC members money.

All (SDSU, Boise, AF, and BYU) will add money for existing members, plus bring the AAC closer to possible P6 (AQ) status.

The argument that the MW might be making
$3M/Member in the next media deal and thus any member of the MW will not add value if added to the AAC is an irrational statement.

No new member addition to any conference was making what their value became after being added to a new conference, never.

BYU, AF, BSU, and SDSU from the West will all ad value, I dare to say that even 4-5 teams East of the Mississippi will add value to the AAC.

Most of the largest Urban Markets and Universities are in the east as are the largest Enrollments.

(12-20-2019 03:46 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 12:50 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 11:48 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 10:03 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 04:17 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  TCU is in the B12 because the B12 were desperate. They needed to find a team, and then 2 to make sure they were not raided out of existence.

I would respectfully suggest that we are in the same situation, whether we realize it or not.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

We need to fight harder that the Big XII had to they were fighting for playoff access (CCG for access), we literaly fighting for survival, yes still fighting.

The B12 lost no money to existing members by adding TCU - in that sense we are in a very different situation.

Other than most (Army/VCU) of the possible additions east of the Mississippi, the additions out west will not cost the AAC members money.

All (SDSU, Boise, AF, and BYU) will add money for existing members, plus bring the AAC closer to possible P6 (AQ) status.

The argument that the MW might be making
$3M/Member in the next media deal and thus any member of the MW will not add value if added to the AAC is an irrational statement.

No new member addition to any conference was making what their value became after being added to a new conference, never.

BYU, AF, BSU, and SDSU from the West will all ad value, I dare to say that even 4-5 teams East of the Mississippi will add value to the AAC.

Most of the largest Urban Markets and Universities are in the east as are the largest Enrollments.

Who are the schools east of the MS & south of Philly that could add value to the AAC?

(12-20-2019 04:44 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 03:46 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 12:50 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 11:48 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 10:03 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  I would respectfully suggest that we are in the same situation, whether we realize it or not.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

We need to fight harder that the Big XII had to they were fighting for playoff access (CCG for access), we literaly fighting for survival, yes still fighting.

The B12 lost no money to existing members by adding TCU - in that sense we are in a very different situation.

Other than most (Army/VCU) of the possible additions east of the Mississippi, the additions out west will not cost the AAC members money.

All (SDSU, Boise, AF, and BYU) will add money for existing members, plus bring the AAC closer to possible P6 (AQ) status.

The argument that the MW might be making
$3M/Member in the next media deal and thus any member of the MW will not add value if added to the AAC is an irrational statement.

No new member addition to any conference was making what their value became after being added to a new conference, never.

BYU, AF, BSU, and SDSU from the West will all ad value, I dare to say that even 4-5 teams East of the Mississippi will add value to the AAC.

Most of the largest Urban Markets and Universities are in the east as are the largest Enrollments.

Who are the schools east of the MS & south of Philly that could add value to the AAC?

There are lots of 'em. lol....the problem is they are all in the SEC or ACC.

(12-19-2019 12:11 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  Don't need to do anything beyond playing uneven divisions. No waiver needed & much better than adding a school that dilutes value of the conference.

.
It seems abundantly clear that the AAC is not going to add a school that "dilutes value of the conference." If anyone is afraid that this could happen, they can rest assured.

Not only does the conference have a clearly articulated strategic plan that mandates further improvement, but ESPN would not stand idly by and support the addition of a school that would adversely affect their bottom line, either.

The current discussion is not about the "dangers" of replacing UConn, but about the enhancements to the conference (especially the viewership market) that adding any potential member would present.

The AAC and its broadcasters will take a hit from losing the UConn market area in the lucrative northeastern region, and the UConn basketball brand.

The main question is - of all the potential candidates for membership - which combination of FB only and BB/olympic schools would add the most to the conference, going forward?

Adding a BB/olympic member, such as VCU or Dayton, would be as beneficial to the conference as adding Wichita State was, and would help maintain the overall quality of AAC men's basketball.

To lose UConn, without reloading with a BB program of comparable quality, would certainly diminish the stature of the conference, leaving us with only a handful of perennial high-end BB programs. To go more than one season without a solid replacement for UConn BB could weaken the case for inclusion of the AAC as a "Major 7" BB conference.

.
In FB, the quality of the conference is not threatened by the loss of UConn, but the loss of the northeastern U.S. market area remains a very significant concern, from a broadcasting and national visibility standpoint.

Adding a Colorado FB-only school (AF, CSU) would help the by expanding the footprint into the Boulder/Denver to Colorado Springs area, in particular, and into the Rocky Mountain region (and time zone), more broadly.

SDSU, which isn't too distant a FB only add, according to Aresco's recent statement, would be a strong FB add, which would extend the footprint into southern California and the western/mountain time zones.

All three schools, particularly AF and SDSU, would enhance the national visibility, viewership, and brand of the conference.

(12-20-2019 04:44 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 03:46 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 12:50 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 11:48 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 10:03 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  I would respectfully suggest that we are in the same situation, whether we realize it or not.

^^^^ THIS ^^^^

We need to fight harder that the Big XII had to they were fighting for playoff access (CCG for access), we literaly fighting for survival, yes still fighting.

The B12 lost no money to existing members by adding TCU - in that sense we are in a very different situation.

Other than most (Army/VCU) of the possible additions east of the Mississippi, the additions out west will not cost the AAC members money.

All (SDSU, Boise, AF, and BYU) will add money for existing members, plus bring the AAC closer to possible P6 (AQ) status.

The argument that the MW might be making
$3M/Member in the next media deal and thus any member of the MW will not add value if added to the AAC is an irrational statement.

No new member addition to any conference was making what their value became after being added to a new conference, never.

BYU, AF, BSU, and SDSU from the West will all ad value, I dare to say that even 4-5 teams East of the Mississippi will add value to the AAC.

Most of the largest Urban Markets and Universities are in the east as are the largest Enrollments.

Who are the schools east of the MS & south of Philly that could add value to the AAC?

lol, are you implying that I was referring to Buffalo?

As far as obvious value, Army/VCU... And I know some people laugh at the notion of adding App Sate, ODU and especially Georgia State, but App State and ODU have been very successful in resent years and Georgia State Checks very box except for History of success and Academic fit... And Buffalo might be the "darling" of the academic administrators, after all it's still "College Athletics.

(12-20-2019 06:26 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(12-19-2019 12:11 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  Don't need to do anything beyond playing uneven divisions. No waiver needed & much better than adding a school that dilutes value of the conference.

.
It seems abundantly clear that the AAC is not going to add a school that "dilutes value of the conference." If anyone is afraid that this could happen, they can rest assured.

Not only does the conference have a clearly articulated strategic plan that mandates further improvement, but ESPN would not stand idly by and support the addition of a school that would adversely affect their bottom line, either.

The current discussion is not about the "dangers" of replacing UConn, but about the enhancements to the conference (especially the viewership market) that adding any potential member would present.

The AAC and its broadcasters will take a hit from losing the UConn market area in the lucrative northeastern region, and the UConn basketball brand.

The main question is - of all the potential candidates for membership - which combination of FB only and BB/olympic schools would add the most to the conference, going forward?

Adding a BB/olympic member, such as VCU or Dayton, would be as beneficial to the conference as adding Wichita State was, and would help maintain the overall quality of AAC men's basketball.

To lose UConn, without reloading with a BB program of comparable quality, would certainly diminish the stature of the conference, leaving us with only a handful of perennial high-end BB programs. To go more than one season without a solid replacement for UConn BB could weaken the case for inclusion of the AAC as a "Major 7" BB conference.

.
In FB, the quality of the conference is not threatened by the loss of UConn, but the loss of the northeastern U.S. market area remains a very significant concern, from a broadcasting and national visibility standpoint.

Adding a Colorado FB-only school (AF, CSU) would help the by expanding the footprint into the Boulder/Denver to Colorado Springs area, in particular, and into the Rocky Mountain region (and time zone), more broadly.

SDSU, which isn't too distant a FB only add, according to Aresco's recent statement, would be a strong FB add, which would extend the footprint into southern California and the western/mountain time zones.

All three schools, particularly AF and SDSU, would enhance the national visibility, viewership, and brand of the conference.

All of your points are spot on. That being said nobody and I mean NOBODY cares about college football in the northeast. Maybe with Flutie and McNabb but outside of that nobody. That’s a sad fact. We were a terrible fit for this conference. You’ll find out Temple is next. We’re too far from the mid point of this league.

(12-20-2019 07:59 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 04:44 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 03:46 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 12:50 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(12-20-2019 11:48 AM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  ^^^^ THIS ^^^^

We need to fight harder that the Big XII had to they were fighting for playoff access (CCG for access), we literaly fighting for survival, yes still fighting.

The B12 lost no money to existing members by adding TCU - in that sense we are in a very different situation.

Other than most (Army/VCU) of the possible additions east of the Mississippi, the additions out west will not cost the AAC members money.

All (SDSU, Boise, AF, and BYU) will add money for existing members, plus bring the AAC closer to possible P6 (AQ) status.

The argument that the MW might be making
$3M/Member in the next media deal and thus any member of the MW will not add value if added to the AAC is an irrational statement.

No new member addition to any conference was making what their value became after being added to a new conference, never.

BYU, AF, BSU, and SDSU from the West will all ad value, I dare to say that even 4-5 teams East of the Mississippi will add value to the AAC.

Most of the largest Urban Markets and Universities are in the east as are the largest Enrollments.

Who are the schools east of the MS & south of Philly that could add value to the AAC?

lol, are you implying that I was referring to Buffalo?

As far as obvious value, Army/VCU... And I know some people laugh at the notion of adding App Sate, ODU and especially Georgia State, but App State and ODU have been very successful in resent years and Georgia State Checks very box except for History of success and Academic fit... And Buffalo might be the "darling" of the academic administrators, after all it's still "College Athletics.

None of these schools likely add value, i.e., would add tangible contract dollars. App St has a nice FB program in the Sunbelt but very small market - no added contract $$ value. ODU has a nice market overlapped by several stronger programs & a weak FB program - no added value. GSU is in a large market where they have virtually No impact, no fan support & are mid - level, at best in the Sunbelt- no added value. And who wants to add a NE school, extending the conference envelope into an area where no one watches college FB - who wants to play at Buffalo in Nov? Hence, no one adds value east of the MS that is not already in the AAC, SEC or B10 - and frankly several of the ACC schools wouldn't add value either. VCU likely would add some value lost in MBB but FB drives the bus & to add a BB school before adding a FB could restrict an ability to attract the right FB member.