(01-08-2020 01:31 PM)Coach Bonez89 Wrote:  I'm all in on the VCU for all sports but football, since they don't have a squad. I wasn't before, but didn't realize how large their endowment is, in addition to having a medical school. In the end, all that doesn't matter as much to me, but their basketball squad is obviously the main reason.

So you like them well endowed.

(01-08-2020 12:34 PM)mtmedlin Wrote:  The travel cost argument is amazingly bad. The cost to travel for all member to someone ACD like Buffalo isn’t much different than Colorado. Hell, some of the cheaper tickets are actually to major air ports like San Diego, compared to more remote like Tulsa. It actually cost me the same to travel to San Diego out of Tampa compared to Tulsa....so travel costs are highly over emphasized.

Well teams fly charter, not commercial, so I would think that it is different. Still, I agree it's over-stated.

(01-08-2020 03:31 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:59 PM)Z-Fly Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 11:39 AM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 10:11 AM)Z-Fly Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 09:24 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  Nope. Been round and round on this and anyone who understands tv contracts knows that Air Force has plenty of value.

BYU isn’t coming and App state has less than no chance of making it in. Seriously, None. They add no viewership when we already have ECU.

Only part of your statement that was correct is that adding no one is better than App St.

Wouldn't they add their viewers? We don't have the B1G deal.

Too many proper nouns in the post you are answering to understand your meaning. I'm afraid you are gonna have to define who "they" are.

ETA: if you are referring to Appy State, of course they would bring their viewers. The point is, how many could that possibly be? Especially compared to Air Force.

Yes, App State. Wouldn't I have to be a crazy person to reference a team that we weren't currently discussing? I guess my point is, why would ECU matter when discussing App State viewership?

I think it has to do with overlapping viewing areas.

Consider this hypothetical. The Dallas Cowboys, Dallas Mavericks, and Boston Celtics all have games in the exact same time slot tonight. You can pick any two of those three to capture the most eyeballs. Which two do you pick?

Perhaps we would be better off exchanging ECU for APP STATE?

Stop with the "let's add App State" stuff. The AAC already added one hard to reach school from the FBS over-saturated state of North Carolina because of it's supposed football cache and huge fanbase. 2013 ECU is still >>> 2020 App State

Things could certainly change quickly but how has that worked out so far?

(01-08-2020 12:17 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:12 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  UConn's departure has a negative impact on the basketball side and a positive impact on football. Basketball is the side that needs a patch to make up for that value, not football.

Add VCU and get it over with.

jed clampett's reply:

Yes, add VCU, and do it quickly. But to stay with 11 FB schools would be irresponsible, because the only way to ensure the conference's well-being beyond 2026 is to replace UConn FB with a better FB school. Otherwise, the AAC could face the prospects of having only 9 FB programs, given the very real possibility that two AAC schools could be stolen by the Big-12 by 2026.


geosnooker's reply:

Because then we start to creep closer and closer to what the old BigEast was. A laughing stock amongst the power conferences. A Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys over here, and football-onlys over there. Voting imbalances. Jealousies not easily reconciled. A mess.

.
The alarming suggestion that adding 1 FB and 1 BB/olympic school would cause the AAC to follow the path that the old Big East took, or "a Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys and football-onlys," seems overly hyperbolic, to put it mildly.

The old Big East was entirely different. The fundamental reason why the old BE broke up - - after 12 extremely successful seasons - - was that the interests and objectives of their FB/BB schools (mostly large State-affiliated universities) were vastly different from those of the private non-FB schools (a.k.a. the "catholic 7").

Navy (FB only) and Wichita State (non-FB) both consider it to be, by far, in their best interests to play in the AAC. The arrangement has worked out spectacularly well for both schools, and for the AAC as a whole.

The conversation here has focused on following the Navy/Wichita approach to replace UConn with a FB and BB/olympic school, or possibly, another all-sports school (e.g., Colorado State).

There haven't been any indications that the AAC intends to replicate the old Big East's model.

(01-08-2020 05:29 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 01:31 PM)Coach Bonez89 Wrote:  I'm all in on the VCU for all sports but football, since they don't have a squad. I wasn't before, but didn't realize how large their endowment is, in addition to having a medical school. In the end, all that doesn't matter as much to me, but their basketball squad is obviously the main reason.

So you like them well endowed.

Coachboner does yes.

(01-08-2020 08:21 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:17 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:12 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  UConn's departure has a negative impact on the basketball side and a positive impact on football. Basketball is the side that needs a patch to make up for that value, not football.

Add VCU and get it over with.

jed clampett's reply:

Yes, add VCU, and do it quickly. But to stay with 11 FB schools would be irresponsible, because the only way to ensure the conference's well-being beyond 2026 is to replace UConn FB with a better FB school. Otherwise, the AAC could face the prospects of having only 9 FB programs, given the very real possibility that two AAC schools could be stolen by the Big-12 by 2026.


geosnooker's reply:

Because then we start to creep closer and closer to what the old BigEast was. A laughing stock amongst the power conferences. A Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys over here, and football-onlys over there. Voting imbalances. Jealousies not easily reconciled. A mess.

.
The alarming suggestion that adding 1 FB and 1 BB/olympic school would cause the AAC to follow the path that the old Big East took, or "a Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys and football-onlys," seems overly hyperbolic, to put it mildly.

The old Big East was entirely different. The fundamental reason why the old BE broke up - - after 12 extremely successful seasons - - was that the interests and objectives of their FB/BB schools (mostly large State-affiliated universities) were vastly different from those of the private non-FB schools (a.k.a. the "catholic 7").

Navy (FB only) and Wichita State (non-FB) both consider it to be, by far, in their best interests to play in the AAC. The arrangement has worked out spectacularly well for both schools, and for the AAC as a whole.

The conversation here has focused on following the Navy/Wichita approach to replace UConn with a FB and BB/olympic school, or possibly, another all-sports school (e.g., Colorado State).

There haven't been any indications that the AAC intends to replicate the old Big East's model.

The truth is, those differences were always there---they were just ignored. Why were those differences ignored? Simple. The key to the Big East was the schools were more valuable together than apart. That's why the Big East worked for as long as it did despite the divisive issues. The moment that was no longer true---the Big East splintered.

(01-08-2020 08:21 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:17 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:12 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  UConn's departure has a negative impact on the basketball side and a positive impact on football. Basketball is the side that needs a patch to make up for that value, not football.

Add VCU and get it over with.

jed clampett's reply:

Yes, add VCU, and do it quickly. But to stay with 11 FB schools would be irresponsible, because the only way to ensure the conference's well-being beyond 2026 is to replace UConn FB with a better FB school. Otherwise, the AAC could face the prospects of having only 9 FB programs, given the very real possibility that two AAC schools could be stolen by the Big-12 by 2026.


geosnooker's reply:

Because then we start to creep closer and closer to what the old BigEast was. A laughing stock amongst the power conferences. A Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys over here, and football-onlys over there. Voting imbalances. Jealousies not easily reconciled. A mess.

.
The alarming suggestion that adding 1 FB and 1 BB/olympic school would cause the AAC to follow the path that the old Big East took, or "a Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys and football-onlys," seems overly hyperbolic, to put it mildly.

The old Big East was entirely different. The fundamental reason why the old BE broke up - - after 12 extremely successful seasons - - was that the interests and objectives of their FB/BB schools (mostly large State-affiliated universities) were vastly different from those of the private non-FB schools (a.k.a. the "catholic 7").

Navy (FB only) and Wichita State (non-FB) both consider it to be, by far, in their best interests to play in the AAC. The arrangement has worked out spectacularly well for both schools, and for the AAC as a whole.

The conversation here has focused on following the Navy/Wichita approach to replace UConn with a FB and BB/olympic school, or possibly, another all-sports school (e.g., Colorado State).

There haven't been any indications that the AAC intends to replicate the old Big East's model.

So there wasn't a "Navy/Wichita approach"

Navy and the Big East signed membership paperwork in January of 2012. Navy vocally staying the course when the C7 schools left and Boise reneged made Navy one of the most valuable brands and members years before the midshipmen played a game in conference.

The move to add Wichita State came five years later and was based on the inherent value of adding Wichita State sans football, not on any need to match twelve football playing schools with a twelfth all sports school.

(01-07-2020 12:45 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-06-2020 10:13 PM)Atlanta Wrote:  

(01-06-2020 07:46 PM)templefootballfan Wrote:  There 7 Div 1 schools in NC, I would think App St has tough time growing their support.
There on nice run right now, what makes you think they can sustained the run.

They seem to be doing a better job than most not in the AAC. Point is if BYU doesn't want to join us, no plan makes sense to go west. I think that means we don't add anyone, but for those that think we will add someone then App St with a growing program that competes within our footprint is the best choice.

"(App State is on a) nice run right now, (but) what makes you think they can sustain the run(?)"

Good question, not 100% answered by saying that App St currently has "a growing program." For example, if their Head Coach should decide to move to greener pastures, will the program continue to prosper?

Adding a member is similar to getting married. It's a long-term commitment.

App is in a situation a lot like Boise St of 15 years ago where they've become the big guy on the block for a smaller 10 team conference they can always be the center of attention in.

Boise however won a couple of Fiesta Bowls prior to moving to a more competitive conference App has yet to break through. They need another decade of development I think.

(01-08-2020 09:51 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 08:21 PM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:17 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(01-08-2020 12:12 PM)The Grape King Wrote:  UConn's departure has a negative impact on the basketball side and a positive impact on football. Basketball is the side that needs a patch to make up for that value, not football.

Add VCU and get it over with.

jed clampett's reply:

Yes, add VCU, and do it quickly. But to stay with 11 FB schools would be irresponsible, because the only way to ensure the conference's well-being beyond 2026 is to replace UConn FB with a better FB school. Otherwise, the AAC could face the prospects of having only 9 FB programs, given the very real possibility that two AAC schools could be stolen by the Big-12 by 2026.


geosnooker's reply:

Because then we start to creep closer and closer to what the old BigEast was. A laughing stock amongst the power conferences. A Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys over here, and football-onlys over there. Voting imbalances. Jealousies not easily reconciled. A mess.

.
The alarming suggestion that adding 1 FB and 1 BB/olympic school would cause the AAC to follow the path that the old Big East took, or "a Frankenstein conference of basketball-onlys and football-onlys," seems overly hyperbolic, to put it mildly.

The old Big East was entirely different. The fundamental reason why the old BE broke up - - after 12 extremely successful seasons - - was that the interests and objectives of their FB/BB schools (mostly large State-affiliated universities) were vastly different from those of the private non-FB schools (a.k.a. the "catholic 7").

Navy (FB only) and Wichita State (non-FB) both consider it to be, by far, in their best interests to play in the AAC. The arrangement has worked out spectacularly well for both schools, and for the AAC as a whole.

The conversation here has focused on following the Navy/Wichita approach to replace UConn with a FB and BB/olympic school, or possibly, another all-sports school (e.g., Colorado State).

There haven't been any indications that the AAC intends to replicate the old Big East's model.

So there wasn't a "Navy/Wichita approach"

Navy and the Big East signed membership paperwork in January of 2012. Navy vocally staying the course when the C7 schools left and Boise reneged made Navy one of the most valuable brands and members years before the midshipmen played a game in conference.

The move to add Wichita State came five years later and was based on the inherent value of adding Wichita State sans football, not on any need to match twelve football playing schools with a twelfth all sports school.

This is true, but the model worked so well that it is worth repeating if either of the other Service Academy is willing to follow that model.

I would only propose adding a Football only and Olympic only addition if it involved one or both of the service Academies, it would be a mistake to do that with any other additions.

Regarding the model that the BIG EAST had I never liked having football only additions.

Football expansion:

"About a decade after the conference's inception, Big East members decided to become a major football conference and thus added five schools including Rutgers, Miami, Temple, Virginia Tech, and West Virginia – though only Miami would be offered full all-sports membership immediately. The inaugural Big East football season launched in 1991.[9] West Virginia and Rutgers were offered admission to the Big East as full members starting in the 1995–96 academic year,[10] and Notre Dame, committed to its football independence, was offered a non-football membership effective the same year.[11] Virginia Tech would be forced to wait until 2000–01 for full admission,[12] and Temple remained a football-only member until 2004, when it was voted out of the conference due to poor attendance figures, lack of playing success, and inadequate facilities'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_East_C..._expansion

(01-05-2020 05:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 05:03 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is a list of the bottom 20 FBS teams in average attendance based on their last 4 years of attendance (credit to Bullet for posting the list to the Realignment Board). It’s amazing how many of these bottom 20 teams keep getting mentioned as legit options to replace UConn. It’s just moronic.

Bottom 20 schools (Note Idaho was 11,566 their last 4 years in FBS, better than 3 schools on this list)
Texas State 16,456 SB
Buffalo 16,410 MAC
Miami, OH 16,400 MAC
Eastern Michigan 16,343 MAC
Georgia State 16,184 SB
Florida Atlantic 15,920 CUSA
Western Kentucky 15,708 CUSA
MTSU 15,673 CUSA
Bowling Green 15,340 MAC
Florida International 15,159 CUSA
New Mexico State 14,849 IND
San Jose State 14,819 MWC
Central Michigan 14,329 MAC
Louisiana-Monroe 13,569 SB
Coastal Carolina 13,538 SB
UNC Charlotte 12,531 CUSA
Kent State 12,506 MAC
Massachusetts 11,275 IND
Northern Illinois 10,308 MAC
Ball State 9,475 MAC

Was UCF's attendance that great before the AAC? Before UCF hired Frost.

UCF attendance was just over 30K the year before Frost. It was 32K the year before UCF began AAC play. So, it was not anywhere even remotely close to 16K if thats what you are asking. Id also point out---those are 4 year averages on that list---so its not like we are looking at one really bad year. None of the teams on that list should be considered as a viable option.

Saw some same numbers from another poster. I concede. GSU would be a gamble, but adding any other team not Boise Or BYU is the same. I prefer waiting it out, just as you have posted before.

(01-09-2020 05:13 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 05:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 05:03 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is a list of the bottom 20 FBS teams in average attendance based on their last 4 years of attendance (credit to Bullet for posting the list to the Realignment Board). It’s amazing how many of these bottom 20 teams keep getting mentioned as legit options to replace UConn. It’s just moronic.

Bottom 20 schools (Note Idaho was 11,566 their last 4 years in FBS, better than 3 schools on this list)
Texas State 16,456 SB
Buffalo 16,410 MAC
Miami, OH 16,400 MAC
Eastern Michigan 16,343 MAC
Georgia State 16,184 SB
Florida Atlantic 15,920 CUSA
Western Kentucky 15,708 CUSA
MTSU 15,673 CUSA
Bowling Green 15,340 MAC
Florida International 15,159 CUSA
New Mexico State 14,849 IND
San Jose State 14,819 MWC
Central Michigan 14,329 MAC
Louisiana-Monroe 13,569 SB
Coastal Carolina 13,538 SB
UNC Charlotte 12,531 CUSA
Kent State 12,506 MAC
Massachusetts 11,275 IND
Northern Illinois 10,308 MAC
Ball State 9,475 MAC

Was UCF's attendance that great before the AAC? Before UCF hired Frost.

UCF attendance was just over 30K the year before Frost. It was 32K the year before UCF began AAC play. So, it was not anywhere even remotely close to 16K if thats what you are asking. Id also point out---those are 4 year averages on that list---so its not like we are looking at one really bad year. None of the teams on that list should be considered as a viable option.

Saw some same numbers from another poster. I concede. GSU would be a gamble, but adding any other team not Boise Or BYU is the same. I prefer waiting it out, just as you have posted before.

Again, the service academy, Air Force, and VCU seem to fit most posters' expectations best, although it could be argued that SDSU has been as successful as BYU and Boise State have been (10 bowls in a row).

(01-09-2020 08:15 AM)jedclampett Wrote:  

(01-09-2020 05:13 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 05:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 05:03 PM)sierrajip Wrote:  

(01-05-2020 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is a list of the bottom 20 FBS teams in average attendance based on their last 4 years of attendance (credit to Bullet for posting the list to the Realignment Board). It’s amazing how many of these bottom 20 teams keep getting mentioned as legit options to replace UConn. It’s just moronic.

Bottom 20 schools (Note Idaho was 11,566 their last 4 years in FBS, better than 3 schools on this list)
Texas State 16,456 SB
Buffalo 16,410 MAC
Miami, OH 16,400 MAC
Eastern Michigan 16,343 MAC
Georgia State 16,184 SB
Florida Atlantic 15,920 CUSA
Western Kentucky 15,708 CUSA
MTSU 15,673 CUSA
Bowling Green 15,340 MAC
Florida International 15,159 CUSA
New Mexico State 14,849 IND
San Jose State 14,819 MWC
Central Michigan 14,329 MAC
Louisiana-Monroe 13,569 SB
Coastal Carolina 13,538 SB
UNC Charlotte 12,531 CUSA
Kent State 12,506 MAC
Massachusetts 11,275 IND
Northern Illinois 10,308 MAC
Ball State 9,475 MAC

Was UCF's attendance that great before the AAC? Before UCF hired Frost.

UCF attendance was just over 30K the year before Frost. It was 32K the year before UCF began AAC play. So, it was not anywhere even remotely close to 16K if thats what you are asking. Id also point out---those are 4 year averages on that list---so its not like we are looking at one really bad year. None of the teams on that list should be considered as a viable option.

Saw some same numbers from another poster. I concede. GSU would be a gamble, but adding any other team not Boise Or BYU is the same. I prefer waiting it out, just as you have posted before.

Again, the service academy, Air Force, and VCU seem to fit most posters' expectations best, although it could be argued that SDSU has been as successful as BYU and Boise State have been (10 bowls in a row).

I care just about as much about eyeballs as performance at this point. Boise and SDSU can't touch BYU in that department.

A one - off western school makes no sense. It's a made for TV pipe dream that will not provide added conference interest for fans or add $$ TV value unless it's BYU. Bring 4 in from the west or none at all - & only then if it adds $$.

Schools out west are hamstrung by time zone & limits TV money.
Putting 4 in eastern base conf doesn't help that
Their 6 home games are still gonna be 10:30 starts
Now BYU is the exception, Boise is close, but travel has them take a step back.
AF is gonna want 3:30 est starts in Oct & Nov, if late starts effect their crowd. AF will see that as a wash.

ESPN making the call, if you want the same money you have to replace Conn.
Need large market, proximity to NYC, sell lots of ESPN+ subscriptions, decent OOC sch, flexible starts
Biggest obstacle, which a lot people underestimate is ESPN is located in Conn

(01-05-2020 02:35 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is a list of the bottom 20 FBS teams in average attendance based on their last 4 years of attendance (credit to Bullet for posting the list to the Realignment Board). It’s amazing how many of these bottom 20 teams keep getting mentioned as legit options to replace UConn. It’s just moronic.

Bottom 20 schools (Note Idaho was 11,566 their last 4 years in FBS, better than 3 schools on this list)
Texas State 16,456 SB
Buffalo 16,410 MAC
Miami, OH 16,400 MAC
Eastern Michigan 16,343 MAC
Georgia State 16,184 SB
Florida Atlantic 15,920 CUSA
Western Kentucky 15,708 CUSA
MTSU 15,673 CUSA
Bowling Green 15,340 MAC
Florida International 15,159 CUSA
New Mexico State 14,849 IND
San Jose State 14,819 MWC
Central Michigan 14,329 MAC
Louisiana-Monroe 13,569 SB
Coastal Carolina 13,538 SB
UNC Charlotte 12,531 CUSA
Kent State 12,506 MAC
Massachusetts 11,275 IND
Northern Illinois 10,308 MAC
Ball State 9,475 MAC

Attendance figures are so bogus. Actual attendance for some members of the AAC are less than those posted above.

(01-09-2020 10:13 AM)templefootballfan Wrote:  ESPN making the call, if you want the same money you have to replace Conn.
Need large market, proximity to NYC, sell lots of ESPN+ subscriptions, decent OOC sch, flexible starts
Biggest obstacle, which a lot people underestimate is ESPN is located in Conn

I agree with the first sentence, but you immediately lost me after that.

-Agree that ESPN has a big say

-Agree that we have to replace UConn money

-Don't agree that it has to be NYC. Columbia is in NYC, but you'd get more viewership out of Buffalo, Toledo, whoever. Simply being in NYC (or kind of near it in UConn's case) doesn't automatically draw eyeballs. That's especially true for Plus subscriptions. You can no longer count on the casual viewer stumbling across your game. You need an actual fanbase. At the bare minimum, you just have to replace the eyeballs/subscriptions that UConn would have drawn, which about 50% of G4 programs do. So replacing UConn money would just require picking from the top 50%. Most of us, however, would rather make an improvement than just replace low hanging fruit.

-Also Don't understand why ESPN being based in Connecticut is an obstacle

Go and get Toledo!

(01-09-2020 10:32 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  Go and get Toledo!

Please no. Just mentioning a program that we don't want, but still draws more than Khan.