(02-03-2020 09:19 PM)VCE Wrote:  JR, wouldn't FSU add to the bottom line? arguably more successful than UF over the past 35 years, additional penetration into the 3rd/4th? most populous state.

FSU would be a nice addition to any conference, but not because of Florida penetration. The Gators are the state flagship, they already 'penetrate' all parts of the state.

What FSU does add value as is as a national brand. They are one of the top 15 - 20 national football brands.

And in that regard, if the SEC ever did want to add FSU, you can expect the ACC to do whatever it could to keep them, because while FSU would add marginal value to the SEC, losing them would be a big blow to the ACC. FSU provides a much higher percentage of ACC overall football brand value than they would in the SEC.

(02-02-2020 05:31 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(02-02-2020 12:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-01-2020 02:19 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-01-2020 01:21 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  If the Big12 does not get picked apart, then they would still be a “Power” conference or whatever the term is in that day. If the best schools are picked off, I think the AAC would be in a better position to pick who they want of the remaining schools that would likely consist of KSU, ISU, TTU, Baylor, TCU, WVU. I think the MWC would be in more danger, than the AAC. Besides ESPN is going to want to protect their property, which could see a pay bump and contract extension during that time.

2 huge rules of conference realignment:

(1) Sh*t ALWAYS rolls downhill in conference realignment.

(2) Think like a university president, NOT like a fan.

First, the old Big East thought exactly the way that you did - that if the Pac-16 happened, then they could take the Big 12 leftovers and become stronger.

The old Big East quickly found out that if you’re behind another conference today, you CANNOT leapfrog then. Ultimately, the old Big East was crushed and eventually kicked out of the power structure altogether. Similarly, C-USA thought that they could poach the remnants of the old Big East... and then C-USA got crushed. We can go down the line where the WAC has similar delusions of grandeur of poaching a weakened MWC... and the WAC up getting destroyed entirely. Rest assured, even if the Big 12 collapsed, left behind schools like Iowa State would still have the massive upper hand to poach the AAC and other leagues because they’ll have all of the exit fees, old conference distributions from the NCAA Tournament and bowl games, existing TV contracts and other assets that would dwarf the G5. Sh*t ALWAYS runs downhill in conference realignment.

Second, university presidents make the decisions about who they let into the power structure. On-the-field/court results by themselves aren’t enough: they want the right *institutions* (NOT teams). I’ve said this before, but for all of the changes in conference realignment over the past 20 years, there were 63 “power” schools when the BCS started in 1996... and there is now a grand total of 65 power schools today. After all of that shuffling, the net change was that TCU (who was in the power system in the pre-BCS world), Utah and Louisville got elevated and Temple got downgraded. That’s it: a net change of plus 2. The point is that the system will NOT elevate an entire other conference to the power ranks. That’s simply not happening because we have seen that there is remarkable stasis with the membership of who is a power school and who isn’t.

Power *institutions* are largely flagship schools, other major public schools with flagship-like qualities (such as Texas A&M, UCLA, Michigan State, Purdue, etc.) and some top tier privates with key attributes (such as top academics and/or locations in major markets). There are zero directional public schools in the Power Five and thowe only true “city” public school in the power ranks is Louisville. (A school like Pitt is essentially a flagship-like research institution that happens to be in a city.) It might sound crazy to sports fans, but the two schools in the AAC that actually look the most like P5 *institutions* (which are different than teams) are Tulane and SMU. Otherwise, the core of the AAC is made up of city and directional public schools. We might see a couple of those schools get invites to the Big 12 eventually (e.g. I could see Cincinnati plus Texas politics getting Houston into the Big 12 someday), but there’s no way that the entire league gets elevated. University presidents are possibly the single most elitist and snobby group of people in all of America.

In the early 60's Vanderbilt spearheaded an attempt to form what came to be known as the Magnolia League. It included Duke, Vanderbilt, SMU, Tulane and Rice. Duke didn't want to give up the Carolina rivalry and SMU and Rice didn't want to give up Cotton Bowl. The impetus for that type of league still exists, and as the money grows, the schools that are of the "Magnolia" mindset may still be looking to cluster together.

For consideration:

New Magnolia:

Boston College, Syracuse, UVa, Duke, Carolina, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech and Miami

Notre Dame, Northwestern, Pitt, Vanderbilt, Tulane, SMU, Baylor, and TCU.



That leaves 51 schools to be divided into three conferences (16, 16, 15 ?)

What it leaves are 5 schools from the ACC to be placed: Virginia Tech, N.C. State, Clemson, Florida State and Louisville. And it leaves 8 schools from the Big 12 to be placed.

The SEC would be at 13, the Big 10 at 13, AAC at 10 and needing to replace UConn too, and the PAC at 12.

SEC: N.C. State, Clemson, Florida State
PAC: Texas, Oklahoma, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State.
B!G: Kansas, Iowa State, Virginia Tech
AAC: Kansas State, West Virginia, Louisville, Brigham Young, Army and Air Force, Boise State.

The champions of the Big 10, PAC and SEC get an auto bid and the champions of the Magnolia plays the champion of the AAC for the play into the CFP.

Now you can have your Magnolia League with a caveat and the AAC can have access and all of those schools constitute the upper division.

Well, I see we are back to Texahoma going back to the west coast. I think you are correct in that it's the only way to make the PAC relevant on the national stage in the long run.
I like VT going to the B1G....
It probably would be best to demote a few of the Magnolia teams to the AAC if you think everyone should be included

Magnolia:
BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Duke, Northwestern, Miami
UVa, Carolina, Tulane, Wake Forest, GT, Vanderbilt

Notre Dame stays a partial to the Magnolia

AAC
Louisville, Cincinnati, Temple, West Virginia, East Carolina, Navy, Army
USF, Houston, TCU, SMU, Baylor, Tulsa, UCF

Air Force, Boise State and BYU remain as they are.

Champions only....with three "wild card" teams going to the highest rated regardless of conference that are not champions.

(02-04-2020 08:40 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(02-03-2020 09:19 PM)VCE Wrote:  JR, wouldn't FSU add to the bottom line? arguably more successful than UF over the past 35 years, additional penetration into the 3rd/4th? most populous state.

FSU would be a nice addition to any conference, but not because of Florida penetration. The Gators are the state flagship, they already 'penetrate' all parts of the state.

What FSU does add value as is as a national brand. They are one of the top 15 - 20 national football brands.

And in that regard, if the SEC ever did want to add FSU, you can expect the ACC to do whatever it could to keep them, because while FSU would add marginal value to the SEC, losing them would be a big blow to the ACC. FSU provides a much higher percentage of ACC overall football brand value than they would in the SEC.

Splitting a state seems to add value. FSU is of more value to the ACC than they would be to the SEC and Texas A&M is of more value to the SEC than they were to the Big 12.

Back to the original question....

I think if the American got Boise State and BYU to buy in, along with either Army or Air Force, they could have a pretty strong conference

ALSO

I think they would have to get the access bid for many years straight, like 7-10 years. If they dominate get access bid, and WIN impressively against their opponents, I think you would see media sentiment start coming around.

They need to add and absorb the best teams from the G5. Right now that's Boise State. If App State started dominating for a stretch, maybe add them. They have to own the G5, be the king of the hill

The Mountain West back in the late 2000s was looking very strong with BYU, Utah, and TCU. They added Boise State way too late though, and before you knew it, realignment rolled over them pretty hard.

(02-04-2020 04:33 PM)EvilVodka Wrote:  Back to the original question....

I think if the American got Boise State and BYU to buy in, along with either Army or Air Force, they could have a pretty strong conference

ALSO

I think they would have to get the access bid for many years straight, like 7-10 years. If they dominate get access bid, and WIN impressively against their opponents, I think you would see media sentiment start coming around.

Look what happened between 2012 and 2020: The AAC was clearly the most in-demand of the G5 conferences in terms of viewership, and yet when it came to renew contracts that reflect that market demand, the bowl ties and the media deal, what did we see?

1) The bowl deal was an abortion, the new ties aren't arguably any better overall than the old ties.

2) Yes, the media deal more than tripled the money. But, if you start out with 20 cents and triple it, you still aren't left with much money. Bottom line is the AAC is going to be making $6m a year in 2020, which leaves them tens of millions *per year* behind the Power conferences, and that relatively paltry sum is going to increase all the way up to .... $8m a year over 12 long years. By "P" standards that is chump change money.

IOW's, after 7 years of what Aresco - and to be fair, most media - called excellent performance in terms of viewership and performance on the field, that's all the gains the AAC was able to make.

That's not promising. If you are an AAC school with "P" ambitions, the smart strategy is to build you institutional and athletic strength as much as you can, so that if a calamity arises among the P5, such as P5 raiding another P5, you are in position to market yourself as the best "backfill" candidate among the G5. As farfetched as that prospect seems now, it is still probably far more likely than your entire conference being elevated.

In ten years from now I think the AAC is down 4-5 of it's original line up. As for those who could replace them I would say first look at the CUSA schools who missed the AAC invite last time (S. Miss, Rice & UAB), some of the other top CUSA schools (Marshall & WKU) and a top Sun Belt program (App State). An outside shot that temple would want another Northeastern school and push for UMass. I don't think anyone from the MWC or the MAC would leave for the watered down AAC.

In 10 years, you dolts will still be talking about us. Aresco has earned his money.

(02-04-2020 10:33 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  In 10 years, you dolts will still be talking about us. Aresco has earned his money.

We talk a lot about the SWC, WAC, Metro and Big East FB conferences too.

(02-04-2020 10:37 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:33 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  In 10 years, you dolts will still be talking about us. Aresco has earned his money.

We talk a lot about the SWC, WAC, Metro and Big East FB conferences too.

Where?

(02-04-2020 10:38 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:37 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:33 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  In 10 years, you dolts will still be talking about us. Aresco has earned his money.

We talk a lot about the SWC, WAC, Metro and Big East FB conferences too.

Where?

Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

(02-04-2020 10:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:38 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:37 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:33 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  In 10 years, you dolts will still be talking about us. Aresco has earned his money.

We talk a lot about the SWC, WAC, Metro and Big East FB conferences too.

Where?

Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

Please talk about the SWC. My school has a national championship in football- something Rutgers will never have.

(02-04-2020 10:44 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:38 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:37 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:33 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  In 10 years, you dolts will still be talking about us. Aresco has earned his money.

We talk a lot about the SWC, WAC, Metro and Big East FB conferences too.

Where?

Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

Please talk about the SWC. My school has a national championship in football- something Rutgers will never have.

And that has what to do with any of this?

(02-04-2020 10:30 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  In ten years from now I think the AAC is down 4-5 of it's original line up. As for those who could replace them I would say first look at the CUSA schools who missed the AAC invite last time (S. Miss, Rice & UAB), some of the other top CUSA schools (Marshall & WKU) and a top Sun Belt program (App State). An outside shot that temple would want another Northeastern school and push for UMass. I don't think anyone from the MWC or the MAC would leave for the watered down AAC.

If we do see a scenario wherein, say, the Big 12 loses several members and basically takes the better half of the AAC to backfill, it's quite plausible IMO for the AAC to revert to a more regional conference. They would no longer have a legit claim to be the "best of the rest", as that honor would go to the Big 12, so there'd be no reason to maintain such a geographically widespread conference. Perhaps in becoming more regional, the AAC could also facilitate the shuffling of schools between CUSA and maybe even the Sun Belt, permitting those conferences to become more regional as well. Hard to say exactly what would happen, since that's a ways down a potential cascade of realignment moves.

(02-04-2020 10:44 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:38 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:37 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:33 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  In 10 years, you dolts will still be talking about us. Aresco has earned his money.

We talk a lot about the SWC, WAC, Metro and Big East FB conferences too.

Where?

Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

Please talk about the SWC. My school has a national championship in football- something Rutgers will never have.

I have no dog in the fight, but I don't know if SMU fans can legit trash-talk Rutgers fans. Big Ten >>>>>>> AAC.

(02-04-2020 10:58 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:44 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:38 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:37 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  We talk a lot about the SWC, WAC, Metro and Big East FB conferences too.

Where?

Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

Please talk about the SWC. My school has a national championship in football- something Rutgers will never have.

I have no dog in the fight, but I don't know if SMU fans can legit trash-talk Rutgers fans. Big Ten >>>>>>> AAC.

Seriously, Rutgers??

Yes the Big 10 is tops but come on Rutgers?

(02-04-2020 10:56 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:30 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  In ten years from now I think the AAC is down 4-5 of it's original line up. As for those who could replace them I would say first look at the CUSA schools who missed the AAC invite last time (S. Miss, Rice & UAB), some of the other top CUSA schools (Marshall & WKU) and a top Sun Belt program (App State). An outside shot that temple would want another Northeastern school and push for UMass. I don't think anyone from the MWC or the MAC would leave for the watered down AAC.

If we do see a scenario wherein, say, the Big 12 loses several members and basically takes the better half of the AAC to backfill, it's quite plausible IMO for the AAC to revert to a more regional conference. They would no longer have a legit claim to be the "best of the rest", as that honor would go to the Big 12, so there'd be no reason to maintain such a geographically widespread conference. Perhaps in becoming more regional, the AAC could also facilitate the shuffling of schools between CUSA and maybe even the Sun Belt, permitting those conferences to become more regional as well. Hard to say exactly what would happen, since that's a ways down a potential cascade of realignment moves.

The only issue with the AAC going full regional is Temple, I doubt they would willingly leave. If Cincy and Memphis go then there is a big hole between the eastern side and the western side. A hole that teams like WKU, Marshall, UAB and S. Miss could fill.

(02-04-2020 11:01 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:58 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:44 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:38 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Where?

Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

Please talk about the SWC. My school has a national championship in football- something Rutgers will never have.

I have no dog in the fight, but I don't know if SMU fans can legit trash-talk Rutgers fans. Big Ten >>>>>>> AAC.

Seriously, Rutgers??

Yes the Big 10 is tops but come on Rutgers?

Well, you're talking about a heretofore unrepeated topping of an opinion poll from 1935. Meanwhile, Rutgers is laughing all the way to the bank.

(02-04-2020 11:04 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 11:01 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:58 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:44 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

Please talk about the SWC. My school has a national championship in football- something Rutgers will never have.

I have no dog in the fight, but I don't know if SMU fans can legit trash-talk Rutgers fans. Big Ten >>>>>>> AAC.

Seriously, Rutgers??

Yes the Big 10 is tops but come on Rutgers?

Well, you're talking about a heretofore unrepeated topping of an opinion poll from 1935. Meanwhile, Rutgers is laughing all the way to the bank.

Yes, SMU is embarrassed about money

(02-04-2020 11:01 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:58 PM)Nerdlinger Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:44 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:42 PM)RutgersGuy Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 10:38 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  Where?

Here, on the realignment boards. Where else? It's also where most of us only ever talk about the AAC.

Please talk about the SWC. My school has a national championship in football- something Rutgers will never have.

I have no dog in the fight, but I don't know if SMU fans can legit trash-talk Rutgers fans. Big Ten >>>>>>> AAC.

Seriously, Rutgers??

Yes the Big 10 is tops but come on Rutgers?

I would say getting into the B1G is a bigger and longer lasting accomplishment than a championship from when the current recruits parents were kids.

(02-02-2020 12:51 PM)XLance Wrote:  

(02-01-2020 02:19 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(02-01-2020 01:21 PM)Garrettabc Wrote:  If the Big12 does not get picked apart, then they would still be a “Power” conference or whatever the term is in that day. If the best schools are picked off, I think the AAC would be in a better position to pick who they want of the remaining schools that would likely consist of KSU, ISU, TTU, Baylor, TCU, WVU. I think the MWC would be in more danger, than the AAC. Besides ESPN is going to want to protect their property, which could see a pay bump and contract extension during that time.

2 huge rules of conference realignment:

(1) Sh*t ALWAYS rolls downhill in conference realignment.

(2) Think like a university president, NOT like a fan.

First, the old Big East thought exactly the way that you did - that if the Pac-16 happened, then they could take the Big 12 leftovers and become stronger.

The old Big East quickly found out that if you’re behind another conference today, you CANNOT leapfrog then. Ultimately, the old Big East was crushed and eventually kicked out of the power structure altogether. Similarly, C-USA thought that they could poach the remnants of the old Big East... and then C-USA got crushed. We can go down the line where the WAC has similar delusions of grandeur of poaching a weakened MWC... and the WAC up getting destroyed entirely. Rest assured, even if the Big 12 collapsed, left behind schools like Iowa State would still have the massive upper hand to poach the AAC and other leagues because they’ll have all of the exit fees, old conference distributions from the NCAA Tournament and bowl games, existing TV contracts and other assets that would dwarf the G5. Sh*t ALWAYS runs downhill in conference realignment.

Second, university presidents make the decisions about who they let into the power structure. On-the-field/court results by themselves aren’t enough: they want the right *institutions* (NOT teams). I’ve said this before, but for all of the changes in conference realignment over the past 20 years, there were 63 “power” schools when the BCS started in 1996... and there is now a grand total of 65 power schools today. After all of that shuffling, the net change was that TCU (who was in the power system in the pre-BCS world), Utah and Louisville got elevated and Temple got downgraded. That’s it: a net change of plus 2. The point is that the system will NOT elevate an entire other conference to the power ranks. That’s simply not happening because we have seen that there is remarkable stasis with the membership of who is a power school and who isn’t.

Power *institutions* are largely flagship schools, other major public schools with flagship-like qualities (such as Texas A&M, UCLA, Michigan State, Purdue, etc.) and some top tier privates with key attributes (such as top academics and/or locations in major markets). There are zero directional public schools in the Power Five and thowe only true “city” public school in the power ranks is Louisville. (A school like Pitt is essentially a flagship-like research institution that happens to be in a city.) It might sound crazy to sports fans, but the two schools in the AAC that actually look the most like P5 *institutions* (which are different than teams) are Tulane and SMU. Otherwise, the core of the AAC is made up of city and directional public schools. We might see a couple of those schools get invites to the Big 12 eventually (e.g. I could see Cincinnati plus Texas politics getting Houston into the Big 12 someday), but there’s no way that the entire league gets elevated. University presidents are possibly the single most elitist and snobby group of people in all of America.

In the early 60's Vanderbilt spearheaded an attempt to form what came to be known as the Magnolia League. It included Duke, Vanderbilt, SMU, Tulane and Rice. Duke didn't want to give up the Carolina rivalry and SMU and Rice didn't want to give up Cotton Bowl. The impetus for that type of league still exists, and as the money grows, the schools that are of the "Magnolia" mindset may still be looking to cluster together.

For consideration:

New Magnolia:

Boston College, Syracuse, UVa, Duke, Carolina, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech and Miami

Notre Dame, Northwestern, Pitt, Vanderbilt, Tulane, SMU, Baylor, and TCU.



That leaves 51 schools to be divided into three conferences (16, 16, 15 ?)

"Second, university presidents make the decisions about who they let into the power structure. On-the-field/court results by themselves aren’t enough: they want the right *institutions* (NOT teams)."

Never underestimate collegiate snobbery.