(08-04-2020 01:37 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 12:55 PM)CaliWG Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:59 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:51 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  No, that's is likely not the motivation at all. It is simply playing BYU is an upgrade to playing an OOC game against a weak G5 or FCS. And there is potential to make additional revenue. Obviously UH liked the idea, it's already a scheduled game.

additional revenue is a myth with no ground basis in reality..ESPN is 100% not going to negotiate to give anyone more money in the covid era especially for a recently signed new contract...its a myth you are spreading and a bad one

byu over the last 3 years- 7-6, 7-6. 4-9

and your UH point backs my point not yours...if you desire byu, just go schedule them individually...no mandate required

And yet in all that mediocrity they still managed to beat USC, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and an undefeated Boise State team, which allowed your Tigers to get into a NY6 bowl. The fact is that BYU is a dangerous team that would be in the mix for a conference title. And that isn't something you want to deal with, even if they raise the profile of the conference for a year.

No to saving BYU. We don't really have a relationship with them. Those who were in the WAC with them know they are a pain in the ass sometimes to deal with. Plus Pesik is right this is the time to play hardball with them. We don't just say yes, but if BYU makes a reasonable offer then we consider it as mutually beneficial and that it might build the relationship some as well as a trial run. There is no reason to help them just out of kindness. We're not taking SDSU who is about to get stuck with an aging pro stadium because no one needs to be expanding campus for quite a while and didn't need it before that anyway. No way broke as hell California is paying for that pipe dream and Boise has zero chance of clearing the presidents and burnt the bridge behind them to begin with. The western wing, if BYU came, would be CSU and Air Force not a further expansion to a team who hasn't successfully challanged this conference for ratings or NY6 in five years and a program who lost the coach who ushered in their limited almost success. Those schools make nice stepping stones to BYU and make the west division contiguous if we want. Or flip Tulane for Navy and call it a day.

Yes to throwing a life vest to Army, who might be willing to make a scheduling alliance or join following this year. A team that has relationships previously with some schools here and maintained it positively as a conference member and then left for reasonable reasons. One that has a special relationship and has the one game that will be played and may have the students in attendance. So even if the season goes hard right offering or accepting them gets the conference mentioned even more in that game. A program the presidents would be tickled pink to welcome and who we know will be upholding the highest standards and can match what we do.

Cut blocks over nut shots is my vote this year.

Nailed it. BYU was invited with the first wave of us that joined (UCF, Memphis, Houston, SMU) and they turned it down. With Uconn's spot being available Aresco obviously went out to Provo to discuss the possibility of joining the AAC, clearly there wasn't any serious consideration since they signed their indy tv contract. We're supposed to scrabble to bail them out so they can keep their indy status? NOPE. The ONLY way we give them conference shelter this year is if they agree to join moving forward. And to keep beating this dead horse, anyone's free to schedule them.

Army yes extend the olive branch and maybe they'll see that AAC membership would be way better than their sh*t storm in CUSA.

something i noted earlier but was overlooked by my bigger point--

we dont need byu--without playing a single non-conference game the perception of the aac will likely have our champion playing in the NY6

byu is the one in a bind, they are getting way more out of this than us in a 1 year deal-- not only getting out of a horrible scheduling dilemma, we'd give them a chance at a conference title, and a great shot at a major bowl game--the alternative is a scheduling a bunch of bad mid-majors for nothing

we are not "the protectors" of byu and have no obligation to bail them out.. they chose independence on their own and have made comments that we are below them..
instead of bailing them out because of "good will" or "being nice"..tell byu to bring something to the table

they are the ones in a rough situation, they should compromise not us....byu could offer to join for multiple years, till 2023--we'd say yes in an instant to that (stall till atleast another viable option comes)..or the reverse make a contract agreement that if they arent in a p5 by 2024-25 and the aac has maintained a certain level of membership they will join the aac, without hesitation we'd say yes

byu has things to give..why are we giving them things for nothing, when they have things to give back

(08-04-2020 03:02 PM)pesik Wrote:  something i noted earlier but was overlooked by my bigger point--

we dont need byu--without playing a single non-conference game the perception of the aac will likely have our champion playing in the NY6

byu is the one in a bind, they are getting way more out of this than us in a 1 year deal-- not only getting out of a horrible scheduling dilemma, we'd give them a chance at a conference title, and a great shot at a major bowl game--the alternative is a scheduling a bunch of bad mid-majors for nothing

we are not "the protectors" of byu and have no obligation to bail them out.. they chose independence on their own and have made comments that we are below them..
instead of bailing them out because of "good will" or "being nice"..tell byu to bring something to the table

they are the ones in a rough situation, they should compromise not us....byu could offer to join for multiple years, till 2023--we'd say yes in an instant to that (stall till atleast another viable option comes)..or the reverse make a contract agreement that if they arent in a p5 by 2024-25 and the aac has maintained a certain level of membership they will join the aac, without hesitation we'd say yes

byu has things to give..why are we giving them things for nothing, when they have things to give back

Bingo! I don't understand the desire for us to give away everything we have to offer with nothing in return. They can call up the AAC office anytime and Aresco will bring a vote to invite them.
I think BYU's political, religious and scheduling issues have and will continue to stop them from being added to an existing P5 conference. Because of that their best chance of being in a power conference is if they were to join the AAC on our rise and help us break into power status.
Here's another scenario: in the next CFP contract the playoffs expand and the AAC is included in place of the access bowl. BYU will immediately be calling for an invite but at that point what do they offer? They wouldn't be elevating the conference, the conference would be elevating them. If by that point we haven't filled the #12 spot yet we could afford to bring on a project school in our footprint and build them up.

(08-04-2020 03:02 PM)pesik Wrote:  something i noted earlier but was overlooked by my bigger point--

we dont need byu--without playing a single non-conference game the perception of the aac will likely have our champion playing in the NY6

byu is the one in a bind, they are getting way more out of this than us in a 1 year deal-- not only getting out of a horrible scheduling dilemma, we'd give them a chance at a conference title, and a great shot at a major bowl game--the alternative is a scheduling a bunch of bad mid-majors for nothing

we are not "the protectors" of byu and have no obligation to bail them out.. they chose independence on their own and have made comments that we are below them..
instead of bailing them out because of "good will" or "being nice"..tell byu to bring something to the table

they are the ones in a rough situation, they should compromise not us....byu could offer to join for multiple years, till 2023--we'd say yes in an instant to that (stall till atleast another viable option comes)..or the reverse make a contract agreement that if they arent in a p5 by 2024-25 and the aac has maintained a certain level of membership they will join the aac, without hesitation we'd say yes

byu has things to give..why are we giving them things for nothing, when they have things to give back

I guess i wouldn't call it something for nothing. None of us currently have a full schedule. BYU would get a shot at a decent bowl and conference championship, and we would collectively get a decent opponent to round out our schedules rather than having to individually wheel and deal with the teams left with openings. Most of the available opponents left out there are garbage.

(08-04-2020 03:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:02 PM)pesik Wrote:  something i noted earlier but was overlooked by my bigger point--

we dont need byu--without playing a single non-conference game the perception of the aac will likely have our champion playing in the NY6

byu is the one in a bind, they are getting way more out of this than us in a 1 year deal-- not only getting out of a horrible scheduling dilemma, we'd give them a chance at a conference title, and a great shot at a major bowl game--the alternative is a scheduling a bunch of bad mid-majors for nothing

we are not "the protectors" of byu and have no obligation to bail them out.. they chose independence on their own and have made comments that we are below them..
instead of bailing them out because of "good will" or "being nice"..tell byu to bring something to the table

they are the ones in a rough situation, they should compromise not us....byu could offer to join for multiple years, till 2023--we'd say yes in an instant to that (stall till atleast another viable option comes)..or the reverse make a contract agreement that if they arent in a p5 by 2024-25 and the aac has maintained a certain level of membership they will join the aac, without hesitation we'd say yes

byu has things to give..why are we giving them things for nothing, when they have things to give back

I guess i wouldn't call it something for nothing. None of us currently have a full schedule. BYU would get a shot at a decent bowl and conference championship, and we would collectively get a decent opponent to round out our schedules rather than having to individually wheel and deal with the teams left with openings. Most of the available opponents left out there are garbage.

Ahem, we are just fine here in Tulsa thanks. Navy lost an FCS game and may have to do some more hoop jumping to make it work for ND.

Honestly we are the most likely teams to fill the plus one games, not only are we in ACC and B12 states but most schools have a previous and often good relationship with those schools. We also have the benefit of being and ESPN property like half the B12 and all of the ACC we're also some of the better options open to them.

I am more and more in favor of a 9+2 if we try to pull this off. Keep Navy and UCF seperate. Make sure two other good teams miss each other to give us a good shot at a one loss or two undefeated teams in the championship game. Make our plus games the best we can and hopefully an undefeated AAC team with an extra data point over the Big12 and PAC has a good shot at a play off. We probably can also finish higher in things like the Massey rankings than one or two p5s like we did last year. We also resemble the p5 in rather than the g5 scrambling to try and keep a regular schedule. Which is especially true if we work it to nothing but p5 ooc or at least get close to that, which we could manage.

It may all be posturing anyway, might as well make it look good.

(08-04-2020 03:30 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:02 PM)pesik Wrote:  something i noted earlier but was overlooked by my bigger point--

we dont need byu--without playing a single non-conference game the perception of the aac will likely have our champion playing in the NY6

byu is the one in a bind, they are getting way more out of this than us in a 1 year deal-- not only getting out of a horrible scheduling dilemma, we'd give them a chance at a conference title, and a great shot at a major bowl game--the alternative is a scheduling a bunch of bad mid-majors for nothing

we are not "the protectors" of byu and have no obligation to bail them out.. they chose independence on their own and have made comments that we are below them..
instead of bailing them out because of "good will" or "being nice"..tell byu to bring something to the table

they are the ones in a rough situation, they should compromise not us....byu could offer to join for multiple years, till 2023--we'd say yes in an instant to that (stall till atleast another viable option comes)..or the reverse make a contract agreement that if they arent in a p5 by 2024-25 and the aac has maintained a certain level of membership they will join the aac, without hesitation we'd say yes

byu has things to give..why are we giving them things for nothing, when they have things to give back

I guess i wouldn't call it something for nothing. None of us currently have a full schedule. BYU would get a shot at a decent bowl and conference championship, and we would collectively get a decent opponent to round out our schedules rather than having to individually wheel and deal with the teams left with openings. Most of the available opponents left out there are garbage.

Ahem, we are just fine here in Tulsa thanks. Navy lost an FCS game and may have to do some more hoop jumping to make it work for ND.

Honestly we are the most likely teams to fill the plus one games, not only are we in ACC and B12 states but most schools have a previous and often good relationship with those schools. We also have the benefit of being and ESPN property like half the B12 and all of the ACC we're also some of the better options open to them.

I am more and more in favor of a 9+2 if we try to pull this off. Keep Navy and UCF seperate. Make sure two other good teams miss each other to give us a good shot at a one loss or two undefeated teams in the championship game. Make our plus games the best we can and hopefully an undefeated AAC team with an extra data point over the Big12 and PAC has a good shot at a play off. We probably can also finish higher in things like the Massey rankings than one or two p5s like we did last year. We also resemble the p5 in rather than the g5 scrambling to try and keep a regular schedule. Which is especially true if we work it to nothing but p5 ooc or at least get close to that, which we could manage.

It may all be posturing anyway, might as well make it look good.

Are there a lot of ACC and B12 teams that don't have a +1 left from their original schedules? I haven't looked through all of them, but would guess most of them still have at least one home game with a team that's still planning on playing. Some of them probably still have two to pick one from.

(08-04-2020 03:46 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:30 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:02 PM)pesik Wrote:  something i noted earlier but was overlooked by my bigger point--

we dont need byu--without playing a single non-conference game the perception of the aac will likely have our champion playing in the NY6

byu is the one in a bind, they are getting way more out of this than us in a 1 year deal-- not only getting out of a horrible scheduling dilemma, we'd give them a chance at a conference title, and a great shot at a major bowl game--the alternative is a scheduling a bunch of bad mid-majors for nothing

we are not "the protectors" of byu and have no obligation to bail them out.. they chose independence on their own and have made comments that we are below them..
instead of bailing them out because of "good will" or "being nice"..tell byu to bring something to the table

they are the ones in a rough situation, they should compromise not us....byu could offer to join for multiple years, till 2023--we'd say yes in an instant to that (stall till atleast another viable option comes)..or the reverse make a contract agreement that if they arent in a p5 by 2024-25 and the aac has maintained a certain level of membership they will join the aac, without hesitation we'd say yes

byu has things to give..why are we giving them things for nothing, when they have things to give back

I guess i wouldn't call it something for nothing. None of us currently have a full schedule. BYU would get a shot at a decent bowl and conference championship, and we would collectively get a decent opponent to round out our schedules rather than having to individually wheel and deal with the teams left with openings. Most of the available opponents left out there are garbage.

Ahem, we are just fine here in Tulsa thanks. Navy lost an FCS game and may have to do some more hoop jumping to make it work for ND.

Honestly we are the most likely teams to fill the plus one games, not only are we in ACC and B12 states but most schools have a previous and often good relationship with those schools. We also have the benefit of being and ESPN property like half the B12 and all of the ACC we're also some of the better options open to them.

I am more and more in favor of a 9+2 if we try to pull this off. Keep Navy and UCF seperate. Make sure two other good teams miss each other to give us a good shot at a one loss or two undefeated teams in the championship game. Make our plus games the best we can and hopefully an undefeated AAC team with an extra data point over the Big12 and PAC has a good shot at a play off. We probably can also finish higher in things like the Massey rankings than one or two p5s like we did last year. We also resemble the p5 in rather than the g5 scrambling to try and keep a regular schedule. Which is especially true if we work it to nothing but p5 ooc or at least get close to that, which we could manage.

It may all be posturing anyway, might as well make it look good.

Are there a lot of ACC and B12 teams that don't have a +1 left from their original schedules? I haven't looked through all of them, but would guess most of them still have at least one home game with a team that's still planning on playing. Some of them probably still have two to pick one from.

Tulsa will be Oklahoma States game. Remember that a data point against an FCS member or a low level g5 won't help much vs a conference only playing themselves. I know several other teams have games vs the ACC and big 12. Now some aren't in the right state or aren't on the road. But especially with the ACC teams I'm sure ESPN can grease the wheels some. I know Pony said hell no to going to yo TCU but what if TCU trades for next year than SMU gets two home games in a row. ESPN gets a bonus big 12 game and SMU has a chance to have fans. Maybe get ESPN to throw in a little extra cash, SMU could get the win, get paid, get two home games with fans, and just give up an empty stadium home game.

Not saying they will do that, but you could see something like that.

Would ECU go to Clemson if it became 2-1 with ESPN smoothing the way?

We have a 2-1 with OU already, but if they call and offer us another future home game in Tulsa to drive a 110 miles in state this year? Yes my AD should take that deal. We can't go to that home game, but I'll show up next year for the OU game. Even if they offer us just money, of all the years to sell your team out this year when your fans will watch on tv any way, when home field advantage isn't homefield advantage? Oh hell yes. Sell and hopefully in a weird year grab wins.

BYU:

Haven't read anywhere that BYU has reached out to the AAC for scheduling games, haven't heard anyone say that BYU has reached out to one of AAC member university for a possibly schedule a game to fill scheduling gaps... Neither has Army as far as I know.

ARMY:

Army can get arrogant Govern Cuomos insane bans (he sued Rhode Island for banning New Yorkers, and today he added Rhode Island to the travel ban) by playing their home games first and then travel to finish the season.

Army or BYU????

My take... Army.

(08-04-2020 04:09 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  BYU:

Haven't read anywhere that BYU has reached out to the AAC for scheduling games, haven't heard anyone say that BYU has reached out to one of AAC member university for a possibly schedule a game to fill scheduling gaps... Neither has Army as far as I know.

ARMY:

Army can get arrogant Govern Cuomos insane bans (he sued Rhode Island for banning New Yorkers, and today he added Rhode Island to the travel ban) by plaing their home games first and then travel to finish the season.

Army or BYU????

My take... Army.

I'd love to see the NY government try to enforce a travel ban against Army....

Whether I agree or disagree with Pesik --- he writes quality stuff with thought. In my mind, I have been on the BYU train but Pesik is influencing that mindset. As if I have ANY control on the matter. Ha-Ha.

But I suppose I can type this now on something that I have thought about for a while. Maximize BOTH Football and Basketball with perhaps an outside of the box idea. And BYU really is the key to this far fetched idea having a chance. So let them in (if they want it) this year for a test run.

I think this is a top five hoops league most years and would challenge the Pac-12 for the fifth spot in football. Perhaps make it where we could not be denied (non-revenue sports travel partners listed consecutively) and the three service academies for football only (Air Force to the Big Sky perhaps for non-football). Quads for 12 games (i.e. four volleyball games vs. each other) and thus tempers the obvious geographical nightmare presented.

West
BYU
San Diego State
Boise State
Air Force\Gonzaga

SW
Navy\Wichita State
Tulsa
SMU
Houston

SE
UCF
USF
Memphis
Tulane

East
Temple
Cincinnati
ECU
Army\VCU

(08-03-2020 09:11 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(08-03-2020 08:54 PM)panama Wrote:  La que?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Ok, we should add Georgia Southern

Nah...we good...

But do go on listening to the guy with 9 posts in 5 years. FOUR in this thread. The others are in a relegation thread.

Reputable enough....

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Welp.

Looks like SMU-TCU might not happen so I’m in favor of replacing them with anyone we can. If we can get BYU I’d be fine with it.

I have had a small change about realignment. On vacation I had a chance to travel through Boone and have come to the following decisions. Appalachian State would not be a bad add for football only, however, Marshal would still be my number one. App is a very doable road trip for Cincy fans. It would be the closest road trip by a number of hours. The location is a beautiful mountain location. Marshal is still a much better choice from my perspective because of proximity. We can only afford to have them as a football add, because we do not need any more 300 plus rpi in basketball.

(08-04-2020 01:24 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 12:55 PM)CaliWG Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:59 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:51 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  No, that's is likely not the motivation at all. It is simply playing BYU is an upgrade to playing an OOC game against a weak G5 or FCS. And there is potential to make additional revenue. Obviously UH liked the idea, it's already a scheduled game.

additional revenue is a myth with no ground basis in reality..ESPN is 100% not going to negotiate to give anyone more money in the covid era especially for a recently signed new contract...its a myth you are spreading and a bad one

byu over the last 3 years- 7-6, 7-6. 4-9

and your UH point backs my point not yours...if you desire byu, just go schedule them individually...no mandate required

And yet in all that mediocrity they still managed to beat USC, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and an undefeated Boise State team, which allowed your Tigers to get into a NY6 bowl. The fact is that BYU is a dangerous team that would be in the mix for a conference title. And that isn't something you want to deal with, even if they raise the profile of the conference for a year.

this is a stupid take...are you just a byu homer???

1) my team "UH" isnt a contender this year i dont care who wins the title..and houston has byu scheduled..adding them would technically mean nothing to my team

2) if i thought byu was going to be elite and a title contender, id actually be for it and see the benefit of adding them...byu competing for a title and playing for something after their 1st loss is something that could motivate them to join a conference

--every preview magazine has already been released byu is not expected to be good or anywhere close to the ucf, memphis or smu

byu has random good wins..but has lost to 2 bottom feeding aac teams (usf and ecu) in those years aswell..
byu has little value in a 1 year addition..

also bring legitimate points not stupid arguments like "you are scared" --you are trying to make it seem like adding a projected 6-7 win team is the greatest thing for the aac..

BYU and Boyzee are probably our most talked about teams joining the conference if we go west. You love Army and that's fine, but the last time Army was in a conference they were terrible, weren't they?

Bottom line is we're looking for a Uconn replacement. You telling us BYU wouldn't be an adequate replacement for them? What are you smoking?

BYU in the conference for this year would be an absolute win-win for both of us. BYU in our conference would definitely bring value to the AAC.

(08-04-2020 07:33 PM)rosewater Wrote:  I have had a small change about realignment. On vacation I had a chance to travel through Boone and have come to the following decisions. Appalachian State would not be a bad add for football only, however, Marshal would still be my number one. App is a very doable road trip for Cincy fans. It would be the closest road trip by a number of hours. The location is a beautiful mountain location. Marshal is still a much better choice from my perspective because of proximity. We can only afford to have them as a football add, because we do not need any more 300 plus rpi in basketball.

ECU did in CUSA what App State is doing in the Sun Belt. There are no promises that they'd finish in the top half of the AAC playing a full schedule.

They recruit at just a flicker below conference average - so unless they get a bump you're adding a 5 to 7 win team.

I like the school a lot but you're putting all of the eggs in one basket.

(08-04-2020 01:37 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 12:55 PM)CaliWG Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:59 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:51 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  No, that's is likely not the motivation at all. It is simply playing BYU is an upgrade to playing an OOC game against a weak G5 or FCS. And there is potential to make additional revenue. Obviously UH liked the idea, it's already a scheduled game.

additional revenue is a myth with no ground basis in reality..ESPN is 100% not going to negotiate to give anyone more money in the covid era especially for a recently signed new contract...its a myth you are spreading and a bad one

byu over the last 3 years- 7-6, 7-6. 4-9

and your UH point backs my point not yours...if you desire byu, just go schedule them individually...no mandate required

And yet in all that mediocrity they still managed to beat USC, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and an undefeated Boise State team, which allowed your Tigers to get into a NY6 bowl. The fact is that BYU is a dangerous team that would be in the mix for a conference title. And that isn't something you want to deal with, even if they raise the profile of the conference for a year.

No to saving BYU. We don't really have a relationship with them. Those who were in the WAC with them know they are a pain in the ass sometimes to deal with. Plus Pesik is right this is the time to play hardball with them. We don't just say yes, but if BYU makes a reasonable offer then we consider it as mutually beneficial and that it might build the relationship some as well as a trial run. There is no reason to help them just out of kindness. We're not taking SDSU who is about to get stuck with an aging pro stadium because no one needs to be expanding campus for quite a while and didn't need it before that anyway. No way broke as hell California is paying for that pipe dream and Boise has zero chance of clearing the presidents and burnt the bridge behind them to begin with. The western wing, if BYU came, would be CSU and Air Force not a further expansion to a team who hasn't successfully challanged this conference for ratings or NY6 in five years and a program who lost the coach who ushered in their limited almost success. Those schools make nice stepping stones to BYU and make the west division contiguous if we want. Or flip Tulane for Navy and call it a day.

Yes to throwing a life vest to Army, who might be willing to make a scheduling alliance or join following this year. A team that has relationships previously with some schools here and maintained it positively as a conference member and then left for reasonable reasons. One that has a special relationship and has the one game that will be played and may have the students in attendance. So even if the season goes hard right offering or accepting them gets the conference mentioned even more in that game. A program the presidents would be tickled pink to welcome and who we know will be upholding the highest standards and can match what we do.

Cut blocks over nut shots is my vote this year.

Does Tulsa have a vote? That's like asking the guy in shipping what his opinion is on a corporate merger.

What style of football would you prefer to watch? BYU or Army? Unbiased answer please.

(08-04-2020 07:49 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 01:24 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 12:55 PM)CaliWG Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:59 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:51 AM)Atlanta Wrote:  No, that's is likely not the motivation at all. It is simply playing BYU is an upgrade to playing an OOC game against a weak G5 or FCS. And there is potential to make additional revenue. Obviously UH liked the idea, it's already a scheduled game.

additional revenue is a myth with no ground basis in reality..ESPN is 100% not going to negotiate to give anyone more money in the covid era especially for a recently signed new contract...its a myth you are spreading and a bad one

byu over the last 3 years- 7-6, 7-6. 4-9

and your UH point backs my point not yours...if you desire byu, just go schedule them individually...no mandate required

And yet in all that mediocrity they still managed to beat USC, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and an undefeated Boise State team, which allowed your Tigers to get into a NY6 bowl. The fact is that BYU is a dangerous team that would be in the mix for a conference title. And that isn't something you want to deal with, even if they raise the profile of the conference for a year.

this is a stupid take...are you just a byu homer???

1) my team "UH" isnt a contender this year i dont care who wins the title..and houston has byu scheduled..adding them would technically mean nothing to my team

2) if i thought byu was going to be elite and a title contender, id actually be for it and see the benefit of adding them...byu competing for a title and playing for something after their 1st loss is something that could motivate them to join a conference

--every preview magazine has already been released byu is not expected to be good or anywhere close to the ucf, memphis or smu

byu has random good wins..but has lost to 2 bottom feeding aac teams (usf and ecu) in those years aswell..
byu has little value in a 1 year addition..

also bring legitimate points not stupid arguments like "you are scared" --you are trying to make it seem like adding a projected 6-7 win team is the greatest thing for the aac..

BYU and Boyzee are probably our most talked about teams joining the conference if we go west. You love Army and that's fine, but the last time Army was in a conference they were terrible, weren't they?

Bottom line is we're looking for a Uconn replacement. You telling us BYU wouldn't be an adequate replacement for them? What are you smoking?

BYU in the conference for this year would be an absolute win-win for both of us. BYU in our conference would definitely bring value to the AAC.

I agree with roughly half of your post. BYU & Boise are in the handful of teams everyone agrees would get approved for the 12th spot. Army is also in that group though.

If the standard is someone better than Uconn's FB program the entire FBS is an upgrade, the standard is raising the value of the conference now. We only have a few years left until the CFP contract is renegotiated, that's our window.

Bringing BYU in for 2020 only is a win-lose. BYU wins by getting shelter and getting to potentially play for the CCG, they win by eliminating the biggest threat to being an independent. We get nothing out of the deal and ensure BYU's safe return to independence never to consider membership again.

The pressures solely on BYU, this situation is a prime example of stability that conference membership brings, its a great selling point we only hurt ourselves by eliminating it.

(08-04-2020 04:05 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:46 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:30 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:18 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 03:02 PM)pesik Wrote:  something i noted earlier but was overlooked by my bigger point--

we dont need byu--without playing a single non-conference game the perception of the aac will likely have our champion playing in the NY6

byu is the one in a bind, they are getting way more out of this than us in a 1 year deal-- not only getting out of a horrible scheduling dilemma, we'd give them a chance at a conference title, and a great shot at a major bowl game--the alternative is a scheduling a bunch of bad mid-majors for nothing

we are not "the protectors" of byu and have no obligation to bail them out.. they chose independence on their own and have made comments that we are below them..
instead of bailing them out because of "good will" or "being nice"..tell byu to bring something to the table

they are the ones in a rough situation, they should compromise not us....byu could offer to join for multiple years, till 2023--we'd say yes in an instant to that (stall till atleast another viable option comes)..or the reverse make a contract agreement that if they arent in a p5 by 2024-25 and the aac has maintained a certain level of membership they will join the aac, without hesitation we'd say yes

byu has things to give..why are we giving them things for nothing, when they have things to give back

I guess i wouldn't call it something for nothing. None of us currently have a full schedule. BYU would get a shot at a decent bowl and conference championship, and we would collectively get a decent opponent to round out our schedules rather than having to individually wheel and deal with the teams left with openings. Most of the available opponents left out there are garbage.

Ahem, we are just fine here in Tulsa thanks. Navy lost an FCS game and may have to do some more hoop jumping to make it work for ND.

Honestly we are the most likely teams to fill the plus one games, not only are we in ACC and B12 states but most schools have a previous and often good relationship with those schools. We also have the benefit of being and ESPN property like half the B12 and all of the ACC we're also some of the better options open to them.

I am more and more in favor of a 9+2 if we try to pull this off. Keep Navy and UCF seperate. Make sure two other good teams miss each other to give us a good shot at a one loss or two undefeated teams in the championship game. Make our plus games the best we can and hopefully an undefeated AAC team with an extra data point over the Big12 and PAC has a good shot at a play off. We probably can also finish higher in things like the Massey rankings than one or two p5s like we did last year. We also resemble the p5 in rather than the g5 scrambling to try and keep a regular schedule. Which is especially true if we work it to nothing but p5 ooc or at least get close to that, which we could manage.

It may all be posturing anyway, might as well make it look good.

Are there a lot of ACC and B12 teams that don't have a +1 left from their original schedules? I haven't looked through all of them, but would guess most of them still have at least one home game with a team that's still planning on playing. Some of them probably still have two to pick one from.

Tulsa will be Oklahoma States game. Remember that a data point against an FCS member or a low level g5 won't help much vs a conference only playing themselves. I know several other teams have games vs the ACC and big 12. Now some aren't in the right state or aren't on the road. But especially with the ACC teams I'm sure ESPN can grease the wheels some. I know Pony said hell no to going to yo TCU but what if TCU trades for next year than SMU gets two home games in a row. ESPN gets a bonus big 12 game and SMU has a chance to have fans. Maybe get ESPN to throw in a little extra cash, SMU could get the win, get paid, get two home games with fans, and just give up an empty stadium home game.

Not saying they will do that, but you could see something like that.

Would ECU go to Clemson if it became 2-1 with ESPN smoothing the way?

We have a 2-1 with OU already, but if they call and offer us another future home game in Tulsa to drive a 110 miles in state this year? Yes my AD should take that deal. We can't go to that home game, but I'll show up next year for the OU game. Even if they offer us just money, of all the years to sell your team out this year when your fans will watch on tv any way, when home field advantage isn't homefield advantage? Oh hell yes. Sell and hopefully in a weird year grab wins.

To answer your Clemson question, of course we would. But Clemson has a home game against Akron they can keep as their +1. They also have The Citadel as an option, but not sure if SoCon is still playing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(08-04-2020 08:02 PM)MidknightWhiskey Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 07:49 PM)Memphis Yankee Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 01:24 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 12:55 PM)CaliWG Wrote:  

(08-04-2020 10:59 AM)pesik Wrote:  additional revenue is a myth with no ground basis in reality..ESPN is 100% not going to negotiate to give anyone more money in the covid era especially for a recently signed new contract...its a myth you are spreading and a bad one

byu over the last 3 years- 7-6, 7-6. 4-9

and your UH point backs my point not yours...if you desire byu, just go schedule them individually...no mandate required

And yet in all that mediocrity they still managed to beat USC, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and an undefeated Boise State team, which allowed your Tigers to get into a NY6 bowl. The fact is that BYU is a dangerous team that would be in the mix for a conference title. And that isn't something you want to deal with, even if they raise the profile of the conference for a year.

this is a stupid take...are you just a byu homer???

1) my team "UH" isnt a contender this year i dont care who wins the title..and houston has byu scheduled..adding them would technically mean nothing to my team

2) if i thought byu was going to be elite and a title contender, id actually be for it and see the benefit of adding them...byu competing for a title and playing for something after their 1st loss is something that could motivate them to join a conference

--every preview magazine has already been released byu is not expected to be good or anywhere close to the ucf, memphis or smu

byu has random good wins..but has lost to 2 bottom feeding aac teams (usf and ecu) in those years aswell..
byu has little value in a 1 year addition..

also bring legitimate points not stupid arguments like "you are scared" --you are trying to make it seem like adding a projected 6-7 win team is the greatest thing for the aac..

BYU and Boyzee are probably our most talked about teams joining the conference if we go west. You love Army and that's fine, but the last time Army was in a conference they were terrible, weren't they?

Bottom line is we're looking for a Uconn replacement. You telling us BYU wouldn't be an adequate replacement for them? What are you smoking?

BYU in the conference for this year would be an absolute win-win for both of us. BYU in our conference would definitely bring value to the AAC.

I agree with roughly half of your post. BYU & Boise are in the handful of teams everyone agrees would get approved for the 12th spot. Army is also in that group though.

If the standard is someone better than Uconn's FB program the entire FBS is an upgrade, the standard is raising the value of the conference now. We only have a few years left until the CFP contract is renegotiated, that's our window.

Bringing BYU in for 2020 only is a win-lose. BYU wins by getting shelter and getting to potentially play for the CCG, they win by eliminating the biggest threat to being an independent. We get nothing out of the deal and ensure BYU's safe return to independence never to consider membership again.

The pressures solely on BYU, this situation is a prime example of stability that conference membership brings, its a great selling point we only hurt ourselves by eliminating it.

Letting them compete for a championship makes us good neighbors. Let's give them the opportunity to prove they're good neighbors too. They get an opportunity to rent for a year in our neighborhood with an an option to buy. I see no reason not to let them in. It's a gateway to the West. It further secures our conference to own the NY6. Next opportunity just might be a chance to get to a championship game. Get Boise and say SDSU and the NY6 is certainly ours. It also gets us that much closer to P5/P6 status.

I am in favor of adding Army in the east, only because teams in the east should have to deal with cut blocks every year just like teams in the west do.