(07-09-2020 10:32 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  UAB. Strong in football and men's basketball. Within the footprint. Strong recruiting market. New/modern facilities. Past associations with majority of the AAC (in C-USA/Metro), with similar academics to many AAC schools. Like-minded institution as well (Southern/Metro school with football-first athletic program).

F*** no.

Go bother yourself with Big East matters and your new buddy Uconn and leave us alone.

I find it funny how all y'all sit there and crap all over the AAC and then feel obligated to recommend who you think we should add. The reality is that if the conference were to take a poll, they should do EXACTLY not what most of the BE, ACC, and other conference fanboys think they should do.

For s***s-and-giggles, as a fan of an AAC program, I'll vote for Southern Miss, and I'll list my reasons:
1) Since the Conference is, in fact, the second coming of CUSA, why not go with an OG school? UC and most of the other AAC schools have good history with Southern Miss. Get the band back together again.

2) Southern Miss is "in the Conference footprint" so there is that.

3) Southern Miss has a good and dedicated fanbase, decent facilities already in place, and...not so long ago...was an "scrappy" football program on the cusp of greatness. Brett Farve, anyone?

4) Nobody has ever tried to kill off the Southern Miss football program. Can't say that about Buffalo or UAB. They have been "D1/FBS" for a long time; can't say that about Georgia State, Georgia Southern, Old Dominion, and a number of others.

5) They are located in the Deep South...which is a football and baseball hotbed.

(07-09-2020 07:11 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 03:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 02:13 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 10:43 AM)esayem Wrote:  I can see Tulane, SMU, Tulsa, and Navy advocating for Rice. Possibly Houston as well since I don’t really think they compete for the same players, but I’m not sure about that.

Birmingham has a nice location because they’re in the footprint, but not encroaching on any other member’s territory, like Old Dominion would (sort of).

Where can I find the athletic budgets of these schools? I’m going to need more data before I vote.

lol... What is it with you and Rice... You been pushing Rice down AAC's throats for quite some time now.. You ever stop and wonder that perhaps the AAC isn't interested in Rice.

They're the best realistic candidate.

What's the deal with AAC fanboys thinking the AAC can land a bunch of western teams despite the fact that would have happened by now if it were even remotely feasible? Ever stop and think BYU and co. are happy where they are and don't want to join the AAC?

lulz

LOL... No they're not ^^^

And as for BYU... It doesn't really matter if they don't join the AAC... The AAC has performed quite sexy with it's current membership lineup.

If it was up to me I say the AAC remains at 11 and call it a day.

The problem with fanboys is they don't understand how university presidents think.

Looking at the great totem pole of realignment, Rice is oddly outside of where they have been located throughout athletic history. AAU, schools within the AAC that would vouch for them, they're within the footprint (this is obviously increasingly more important these days), excellent baseball (also increasingly important), and $$$.

Unfortunately, I'm diagnosing you with Fanboy Syndrome, and you can't be saved. This isn't a laughing matter anymore. I'm sorry.

PS, I hope the AAC can kick down the door for getting rid of divisions. I know the ACC will support it. I don't believe the other P5 conferences will, because they absolutely don't want to see the ACC maximize their potential.

This here ^^^ is rich I must say... Wonder how many fanboys roam this board on a daily basis.

Anyway back to who the AAC snatches up if they're force to adding a 12th member... Other than BYU I don't see anyone who could pass the FOOTBALL eye test as a hands down major improvement addition for the AAC.

Man I hope we remain at 11

(07-09-2020 08:15 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I find it funny how all y'all sit there and crap all over the AAC and then feel obligated to recommend who you think we should add. The reality is that if the conference were to take a poll, they should do EXACTLY not what most of the BE, ACC, and other conference fanboys think they should do.

For s***s-and-giggles, as a fan of an AAC program, I'll vote for Southern Miss, and I'll list my reasons:
1) Since the Conference is, in fact, the second coming of CUSA, why not go with an OG school? UC and most of the other AAC schools have good history with Southern Miss. Get the band back together again.

2) Southern Miss is "in the Conference footprint" so there is that.

3) Southern Miss has a good and dedicated fanbase, decent facilities already in place, and...not so long ago...was an "scrappy" football program on the cusp of greatness. Brett Farve, anyone?

4) Nobody has ever tried to kill off the Southern Miss football program. Can't say that about Buffalo or UAB. They have been "D1/FBS" for a long time; can't say that about Georgia State, Georgia Southern, Old Dominion, and a number of others.

5) They are located in the Deep South...which is a football and baseball hotbed.

Football wise Southern Miss is a major improvement over uconn not even close... Maybe Southern Miss as a football only but only if they first heavily invest in their football stadium, IMO.

(07-09-2020 08:03 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 10:32 AM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  UAB. Strong in football and men's basketball. Within the footprint. Strong recruiting market. New/modern facilities. Past associations with majority of the AAC (in C-USA/Metro), with similar academics to many AAC schools. Like-minded institution as well (Southern/Metro school with football-first athletic program).

F*** no.

Go bother yourself with Big East matters and your new buddy Uconn and leave us alone.

UConn is busy moving in and the rest of us aren't sweating losing football games at the moment.

Best of luck replacing Nebraska. That would have been a good game.

(07-09-2020 08:15 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I find it funny how all y'all sit there and crap all over the AAC and then feel obligated to recommend who you think we should add. The reality is that if the conference were to take a poll, they should do EXACTLY not what most of the BE, ACC, and other conference fanboys think they should do.

For s***s-and-giggles, as a fan of an AAC program, I'll vote for Southern Miss, and I'll list my reasons:
1) Since the Conference is, in fact, the second coming of CUSA, why not go with an OG school? UC and most of the other AAC schools have good history with Southern Miss. Get the band back together again.

2) Southern Miss is "in the Conference footprint" so there is that.

3) Southern Miss has a good and dedicated fanbase, decent facilities already in place, and...not so long ago...was an "scrappy" football program on the cusp of greatness. Brett Farve, anyone?

4) Nobody has ever tried to kill off the Southern Miss football program. Can't say that about Buffalo or UAB. They have been "D1/FBS" for a long time; can't say that about Georgia State, Georgia Southern, Old Dominion, and a number of others.

5) They are located in the Deep South...which is a football and baseball hotbed.

Don't you see? We come here because we're better than you and can see your issues from our ivory towers. That's how the world works, mate.

Southern Miss is logical considering the great totem pole of realignment, but they've been caught by the innumerous start-ups over the last 25 years. Personally, I think they'd be an excellent choice, but I'm not sure they can spend like the rest of the league.

I think the AAC leadership is waiting to see if a program is going to emerge. They have the waiver, so they have time. With COVID-19 effecting college athletics, I think the AAC presidents and AD's are taking notes.... Who is cutting sports? Who is going to struggle if all the P5's drop their non-conference schedules? Who is weathering this pandemic the best? One thing I firmly believe is that the AAC isn't looking to add a mouth to feed. Perhaps when COVID-19 is over a real candidate could emerge.

(07-09-2020 08:35 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Anyway back to who the AAC snatches up if they're force to adding a 12th member... Other than BYU I don't see anyone who could pass the FOOTBALL eye test as a hands down major improvement addition for the AAC.

Wouldn't you like the Bayou Bucket on the conference slate in order to free up some time with some big ol' boys? You love you some big ol' boys!!

(07-09-2020 01:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I voted other. They would drop the CCG for a year or two.

Honestly only Rice can afford the AAC among schools east of the Mountain Time Zone. ODU is plausible, and that is about it.

The money is not enough to flip the equation from net negative to positive for the MWC schools since they would only get a FB share (75%) and would have to drop their Olympics in a bad conference and suffer losses in prominence, NCAA credit distribution, Basketball gate and donations for Olympics, some even paying travel fees as well as the 2nd admission fee. BYU it doesn't help since it down grades their schedule and moves them further from P status, as they'd have to drop most of the P5 schools on their schedule.

The only school where the money makes sense is Colorado State if invited as a full member. They already have an AAC level budget (not even Rice is quite there) and could fit regionally with SMU, Tulsa and Wichita State, and even Memphis and Houston are not too bad travel. As a full member they would be right side up financially with a move. The only question is, would they be willing to break their front range and four corner rivalries (New Mexico, Air Force, Wyoming, Utah State, Boise State and even Colorado) for a shift East, even if it's a net of perhaps $3M a year to the budget (that is significant).

The math doesn't work (or even come close) for San Diego State (a near major Basketball program with a NET of 4 would be relegated to playing the likes of CSUN, CSU Bakersfield, UC Irvine and UC Riverside), Fresno State or Boise State (really negative for them given travel fee for Olympics, the $1.8M bonus from the MWC TV contract and the tilted distributions in their favor).

Army said no even after a summer of strong pitch by the Naval academy, and it's hard to see them change stance, as Indy is working pretty well for them. Air Force has all the same negatives for Olympics as Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State, as well as losing front range rivalries; and they also said no.

The field is really only three: Colorado State, Rice, and Old Dominion. The first two passed the first phase of the Big 12 expansion search, which tells you they are the strongest possible choices. Old Dominion fit geographically and has sufficient support from student fees, but they really don't have enough fan support, tradition or success. So of the three, they are the weakest.

Other names thrown out lack the finances (UTSA, Marshall, Charlotte) or are small schools or both (e.g., UAB, Southern Miss).

The best strategy for the AAC is to ask for a waiver extension if Divisions are still required for a CCG; Covid-19 is a valid reason to put off expansion, and I think the other conferences would agree. Failing that, after the 2021 season they could opt to return to Divisions with Navy skipping one West opponent each year for three years (say Tulane in '22, Tulsa in '23 and Memphis in '24). This is key as June 30th, 2025 is the expiration of the Big 12 GOR, and Oklahoma's decision on whether to stay in the Big 12 or move to another conference (SEC or B1G). If OU stays put, then the AAC will know they need a 12th member. If OU leaves then a decision to expand or not depends upon whom the Big 12 chooses as a replacement (BYU, Houston, Cincy and UCF are the leading candidates) or if they simply stand at 9 and play an 8 game round robin. The scenarios are endless. But the uncertainty about 2025 makes any moves into the AAC unlikely before OU's direction is clear. Even Colorado State would likely put off a move (why join a conference that could see two or three of the top schools leave the day you join) if offered.

The best and most likely strategy is to do nothing, just stretch things out until Spring 2025, when you know what will happen in the big picture. Frankly Divisionless football is the most likely. That is why I voted "other".

North Texas also has an athletic budget of over $40 million.

Also, I know Rice, UNT, and ODU don't have the athletic budgets in the same range as the AAC programs, but our schools don't have the extra $7 million from media money in our pockets either.

But, like I stated in another post, when a real candidate emerges, that adds value to the conference, than the AAC will make their choice. The AAC isn't going to add another mouth to feed.

Yeah Side Show, UNT is very plausible. But with SMU in the same market why bother? ODU is stretching the finances, and not sure they'd be anything more than another ECU type mouth to feed. Rice has more potential, but do they care enough?

Certainly the University Presidents would like Rice. But is Rice willing to commit? They very likely could be another Tulane.

Colorado State is really the only one ready to just plug in and go. And they'd pass the Presidents as well, being the largest (dollar wise) undergraduate research University not in the P5 (no med school to inflate the numbers either). But I can't seem them just jumping. They need to see how the Big 12 plays out. Also they have to decide if $3M a year is worth ditching their current rivals.

The AAC would love Army, BYU or Boise State as football only adds, and they'd tolerate Air Force or San Diego State as football only adds. But the math doesn't work for any of them. That is why it always reduces to Colorado State and Rice.

They'll stay at 11 if they can.

(07-09-2020 09:44 PM)Side Show Joe Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 01:19 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  I voted other. They would drop the CCG for a year or two.

Honestly only Rice can afford the AAC among schools east of the Mountain Time Zone. ODU is plausible, and that is about it.

The money is not enough to flip the equation from net negative to positive for the MWC schools since they would only get a FB share (75%) and would have to drop their Olympics in a bad conference and suffer losses in prominence, NCAA credit distribution, Basketball gate and donations for Olympics, some even paying travel fees as well as the 2nd admission fee. BYU it doesn't help since it down grades their schedule and moves them further from P status, as they'd have to drop most of the P5 schools on their schedule.

The only school where the money makes sense is Colorado State if invited as a full member. They already have an AAC level budget (not even Rice is quite there) and could fit regionally with SMU, Tulsa and Wichita State, and even Memphis and Houston are not too bad travel. As a full member they would be right side up financially with a move. The only question is, would they be willing to break their front range and four corner rivalries (New Mexico, Air Force, Wyoming, Utah State, Boise State and even Colorado) for a shift East, even if it's a net of perhaps $3M a year to the budget (that is significant).

The math doesn't work (or even come close) for San Diego State (a near major Basketball program with a NET of 4 would be relegated to playing the likes of CSUN, CSU Bakersfield, UC Irvine and UC Riverside), Fresno State or Boise State (really negative for them given travel fee for Olympics, the $1.8M bonus from the MWC TV contract and the tilted distributions in their favor).

Army said no even after a summer of strong pitch by the Naval academy, and it's hard to see them change stance, as Indy is working pretty well for them. Air Force has all the same negatives for Olympics as Boise State, Fresno State and San Diego State, as well as losing front range rivalries; and they also said no.

The field is really only three: Colorado State, Rice, and Old Dominion. The first two passed the first phase of the Big 12 expansion search, which tells you they are the strongest possible choices. Old Dominion fit geographically and has sufficient support from student fees, but they really don't have enough fan support, tradition or success. So of the three, they are the weakest.

Other names thrown out lack the finances (UTSA, Marshall, Charlotte) or are small schools or both (e.g., UAB, Southern Miss).

The best strategy for the AAC is to ask for a waiver extension if Divisions are still required for a CCG; Covid-19 is a valid reason to put off expansion, and I think the other conferences would agree. Failing that, after the 2021 season they could opt to return to Divisions with Navy skipping one West opponent each year for three years (say Tulane in '22, Tulsa in '23 and Memphis in '24). This is key as June 30th, 2025 is the expiration of the Big 12 GOR, and Oklahoma's decision on whether to stay in the Big 12 or move to another conference (SEC or B1G). If OU stays put, then the AAC will know they need a 12th member. If OU leaves then a decision to expand or not depends upon whom the Big 12 chooses as a replacement (BYU, Houston, Cincy and UCF are the leading candidates) or if they simply stand at 9 and play an 8 game round robin. The scenarios are endless. But the uncertainty about 2025 makes any moves into the AAC unlikely before OU's direction is clear. Even Colorado State would likely put off a move (why join a conference that could see two or three of the top schools leave the day you join) if offered.

The best and most likely strategy is to do nothing, just stretch things out until Spring 2025, when you know what will happen in the big picture. Frankly Divisionless football is the most likely. That is why I voted "other".

North Texas also has an athletic budget of over $40 million.

Also, I know Rice, UNT, and ODU don't have the athletic budgets in the same range as the AAC programs, but our schools don't have the extra $7 million from media money in our pockets either.

But, like I stated in another post, when a real candidate emerges, that adds value to the conference, than the AAC will make their choice. The AAC isn't going to add another mouth to feed.

Neither do AAC schools as the contract starts this year (20/21). Listed budgets are under the old deal which paid about $1.4M more than CUSA/SBC. As an aside, hopefully USAToday updates their database soon. Heaven knows they’ve had enough time to compile numbers since there’s not much else going on.

(07-09-2020 07:11 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 03:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 02:13 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 10:43 AM)esayem Wrote:  I can see Tulane, SMU, Tulsa, and Navy advocating for Rice. Possibly Houston as well since I don’t really think they compete for the same players, but I’m not sure about that.

Birmingham has a nice location because they’re in the footprint, but not encroaching on any other member’s territory, like Old Dominion would (sort of).

Where can I find the athletic budgets of these schools? I’m going to need more data before I vote.

lol... What is it with you and Rice... You been pushing Rice down AAC's throats for quite some time now.. You ever stop and wonder that perhaps the AAC isn't interested in Rice.

They're the best realistic candidate.

What's the deal with AAC fanboys thinking the AAC can land a bunch of western teams despite the fact that would have happened by now if it were even remotely feasible? Ever stop and think BYU and co. are happy where they are and don't want to join the AAC?

lulz

LOL... No they're not ^^^

And as for BYU... It doesn't really matter if they don't join the AAC... The AAC has performed quite sexy with it's current membership lineup.

If it was up to me I say the AAC remains at 11 and call it a day.

The problem with fanboys is they don't understand how university presidents think.

Looking at the great totem pole of realignment, Rice is oddly outside of where they have been located throughout athletic history. AAU, schools within the AAC that would vouch for them, they're within the footprint (this is obviously increasingly more important these days), excellent baseball (also increasingly important), and $$$.

Unfortunately, I'm diagnosing you with Fanboy Syndrome, and you can't be saved. This isn't a laughing matter anymore. I'm sorry.

PS, I hope the AAC can kick down the door for getting rid of divisions. I know the ACC will support it. I don't believe the other P5 conferences will, because they absolutely don't want to see the ACC maximize their potential.

If Rice was such a slam dunk home run selection for the way the AAC presidents think they would already member. Clearly---the AAC presidents have a different way of looking at expansion.

(07-09-2020 09:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Yeah Side Show, UNT is very plausible. But with SMU in the same market why bother? ODU is stretching the finances, and not sure they'd be anything more than another ECU type mouth to feed. Rice has more potential, but do they care enough?

Certainly the University Presidents would like Rice. But is Rice willing to commit? They very likely could be another Tulane.

Colorado State is really the only one ready to just plug in and go. And they'd pass the Presidents as well, being the largest (dollar wise) undergraduate research University not in the P5 (no med school to inflate the numbers either). But I can't seem them just jumping. They need to see how the Big 12 plays out. Also they have to decide if $3M a year is worth ditching their current rivals.

The AAC would love Army, BYU or Boise State as football only adds, and they'd tolerate Air Force or San Diego State as football only adds. But the math doesn't work for any of them. That is why it always reduces to Colorado State and Rice.

They'll stay at 11 if they can.

At the rate things are going they might be able to stay at 11 long enough to make it to the next round of P5 TV negotiations when contracts open back up.

(07-09-2020 10:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:11 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 03:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 02:13 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  lol... What is it with you and Rice... You been pushing Rice down AAC's throats for quite some time now.. You ever stop and wonder that perhaps the AAC isn't interested in Rice.

They're the best realistic candidate.

What's the deal with AAC fanboys thinking the AAC can land a bunch of western teams despite the fact that would have happened by now if it were even remotely feasible? Ever stop and think BYU and co. are happy where they are and don't want to join the AAC?

lulz

LOL... No they're not ^^^

And as for BYU... It doesn't really matter if they don't join the AAC... The AAC has performed quite sexy with it's current membership lineup.

If it was up to me I say the AAC remains at 11 and call it a day.

The problem with fanboys is they don't understand how university presidents think.

Looking at the great totem pole of realignment, Rice is oddly outside of where they have been located throughout athletic history. AAU, schools within the AAC that would vouch for them, they're within the footprint (this is obviously increasingly more important these days), excellent baseball (also increasingly important), and $$$.

Unfortunately, I'm diagnosing you with Fanboy Syndrome, and you can't be saved. This isn't a laughing matter anymore. I'm sorry.

PS, I hope the AAC can kick down the door for getting rid of divisions. I know the ACC will support it. I don't believe the other P5 conferences will, because they absolutely don't want to see the ACC maximize their potential.

If Rice was such a slam dunk home run selection for the way the AAC presidents think they would already member. Clearly---the AAC presidents have a different way of looking at expansion.

This is a good point. If Rice was ahead of someone like Air Force or BYU in the realignment discussion they would have been added yesterday.

(07-09-2020 10:11 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  Let’s assume that the NCAA says no to divisionless after the waiver.

Let’s also assume that all the favorites (Army, Air Force, BYU, Boise St) have all said no.

Who does the AAC take?

SDSU, Colorado State, and Appalachian State probably belong on the list.

I say you bring in Air Force as a football only member with all other sports in the Big Sky. You place Air Force in the West, move Tulane to the East and you have 11 members in basketball to play a 20 game schedule.

(07-09-2020 10:41 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 10:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:11 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 03:06 PM)esayem Wrote:  They're the best realistic candidate.

What's the deal with AAC fanboys thinking the AAC can land a bunch of western teams despite the fact that would have happened by now if it were even remotely feasible? Ever stop and think BYU and co. are happy where they are and don't want to join the AAC?

lulz

LOL... No they're not ^^^

And as for BYU... It doesn't really matter if they don't join the AAC... The AAC has performed quite sexy with it's current membership lineup.

If it was up to me I say the AAC remains at 11 and call it a day.

The problem with fanboys is they don't understand how university presidents think.

Looking at the great totem pole of realignment, Rice is oddly outside of where they have been located throughout athletic history. AAU, schools within the AAC that would vouch for them, they're within the footprint (this is obviously increasingly more important these days), excellent baseball (also increasingly important), and $$$.

Unfortunately, I'm diagnosing you with Fanboy Syndrome, and you can't be saved. This isn't a laughing matter anymore. I'm sorry.

PS, I hope the AAC can kick down the door for getting rid of divisions. I know the ACC will support it. I don't believe the other P5 conferences will, because they absolutely don't want to see the ACC maximize their potential.

If Rice was such a slam dunk home run selection for the way the AAC presidents think they would already member. Clearly---the AAC presidents have a different way of looking at expansion.

This is a good point. If Rice was ahead of someone like Air Force or BYU in the realignment discussion they would have been added yesterday.

Of course they're not ahead of the pie in the sky options. The AAC doesn't have to make a decision this minute. You're foolish to think Rice isn't on the radar. They're on the Big XII's radar for crying out loud!

(07-09-2020 11:15 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 10:41 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 10:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:11 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 07:02 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  LOL... No they're not ^^^

And as for BYU... It doesn't really matter if they don't join the AAC... The AAC has performed quite sexy with it's current membership lineup.

If it was up to me I say the AAC remains at 11 and call it a day.

The problem with fanboys is they don't understand how university presidents think.

Looking at the great totem pole of realignment, Rice is oddly outside of where they have been located throughout athletic history. AAU, schools within the AAC that would vouch for them, they're within the footprint (this is obviously increasingly more important these days), excellent baseball (also increasingly important), and $$$.

Unfortunately, I'm diagnosing you with Fanboy Syndrome, and you can't be saved. This isn't a laughing matter anymore. I'm sorry.

PS, I hope the AAC can kick down the door for getting rid of divisions. I know the ACC will support it. I don't believe the other P5 conferences will, because they absolutely don't want to see the ACC maximize their potential.

If Rice was such a slam dunk home run selection for the way the AAC presidents think they would already member. Clearly---the AAC presidents have a different way of looking at expansion.

This is a good point. If Rice was ahead of someone like Air Force or BYU in the realignment discussion they would have been added yesterday.

Of course they're not ahead of the pie in the sky options. The AAC doesn't have to make a decision this minute. You're foolish to think Rice isn't on the radar. They're on the Big XII's radar for crying out loud!

Lets say that Houston left the AAC, I think the AAC would stay at 10 or possibly try to land Buffalo & Rice since they have the AAU memberships which adds to the leagues profile. Also Buffalo isn't that big of a geographic outlier, they could be a travel partner with Cincinnati or Temple.

(07-09-2020 07:25 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Rice is a non-starter. There's a reason they weren't/aren't on the radar of the Commish and member institutions. The AAC already has Tulane, Tulsa and SMU as smaller, private research universities. Market, footprint-wise we already have Houston and SMU in Texas. Rice is also located in Houston. How's that Rice basketball program by the way? [crickets]. Personally, my preference is to stay at 11 members. To honor the OP, if I had to pick one from that list it would be UAB primarily for the past conference history, market location, facilities, and football and basketball upside.

Well, the women have won C-USA the past two years. Agree that the men remain a work in progress. But Mike Rhoades showed that it is possible to get 20-win men’s seasons on South Main.

(07-09-2020 09:17 PM)esayem Wrote:  

(07-09-2020 08:35 PM)BigHouston Wrote:  Anyway back to who the AAC snatches up if they're force to adding a 12th member... Other than BYU I don't see anyone who could pass the FOOTBALL eye test as a hands down major improvement addition for the AAC.

Wouldn't you like the Bayou Bucket on the conference slate in order to free up some time with some big ol' boys? You love you some big ol' boys!!

This is an interesting comment. Sure the big boys like to come play in Houston in front of recruits. Now you have Rice and Houston competing for those rare P5 home games. Rice has shown the willingness to move those games to 70,000 seat nrg Stadium, and get a big payday in the process. UH has been less willing outside of the Advocare series.