(01-24-2021 05:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 04:28 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  I guess I was thinking staying closer to the eastern U.S. than going as far west as Idaho.

I know they are C-USA but I feel UAB should be considered. They were C-USA when most of the AAC were, good academics, gives you the city of Birmingham, and solid football and basketball. Brings all sports which means you don’t need to find 2 teams to split with.

Edit: I understand the issue with perception though. The Sun Belt is still fighting being seen as the lowest conference even though they no longer are. I don’t think UAB hurts the brand though.

Regardless, add Boise and whoever for Olympic sports but it’s still only going to be seen as the best conference in the G5. Boise doesn’t change that perception.

UAB just doesnt have much of a brand. If a rather banal UAB type option represents the best the AAC can attract right now, I think the AAC would be wise to just leave the UConn slot open until a more attractive opportunity comes along. Maybe in a few years UAB will be so successful they become the obvious pick---or maybe Clark leaves and they rapidly fade. No reason to gamble on a bland set of candidates where no single candidate really stands out. Just wait, remain patient, and see what develops. You may end up with an opportunity to add one of your top choices---or one of the current candidates may clearly distance themselves from the pack making them the obvious selection to all.

That’s fair. I do think though they fit the description better for what you’re looking for than most other teams in the other 4 conferences excluding Boise.

Don’t you need the waiver though for uneven divisions if you’re not playing a 10 game round robin since there are 11 teams?

(01-24-2021 06:52 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 05:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 04:28 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  I guess I was thinking staying closer to the eastern U.S. than going as far west as Idaho.

I know they are C-USA but I feel UAB should be considered. They were C-USA when most of the AAC were, good academics, gives you the city of Birmingham, and solid football and basketball. Brings all sports which means you don’t need to find 2 teams to split with.

Edit: I understand the issue with perception though. The Sun Belt is still fighting being seen as the lowest conference even though they no longer are. I don’t think UAB hurts the brand though.

Regardless, add Boise and whoever for Olympic sports but it’s still only going to be seen as the best conference in the G5. Boise doesn’t change that perception.

UAB just doesnt have much of a brand. If a rather banal UAB type option represents the best the AAC can attract right now, I think the AAC would be wise to just leave the UConn slot open until a more attractive opportunity comes along. Maybe in a few years UAB will be so successful they become the obvious pick---or maybe Clark leaves and they rapidly fade. No reason to gamble on a bland set of candidates where no single candidate really stands out. Just wait, remain patient, and see what develops. You may end up with an opportunity to add one of your top choices---or one of the current candidates may clearly distance themselves from the pack making them the obvious selection to all.

That’s fair. I do think though they fit the description better for what you’re looking for than most other teams in the other 4 conferences excluding Boise.

Don’t you need the waiver though for uneven divisions if you’re not playing a 10 game round robin since there are 11 teams?

No.
You can play division champs in a conference championship game, even with uneven divisions, so long as the divisions are as even as possible and you play round robin within each division.

(01-24-2021 07:24 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 06:52 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 05:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 04:28 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  I guess I was thinking staying closer to the eastern U.S. than going as far west as Idaho.

I know they are C-USA but I feel UAB should be considered. They were C-USA when most of the AAC were, good academics, gives you the city of Birmingham, and solid football and basketball. Brings all sports which means you don’t need to find 2 teams to split with.

Edit: I understand the issue with perception though. The Sun Belt is still fighting being seen as the lowest conference even though they no longer are. I don’t think UAB hurts the brand though.

Regardless, add Boise and whoever for Olympic sports but it’s still only going to be seen as the best conference in the G5. Boise doesn’t change that perception.

UAB just doesnt have much of a brand. If a rather banal UAB type option represents the best the AAC can attract right now, I think the AAC would be wise to just leave the UConn slot open until a more attractive opportunity comes along. Maybe in a few years UAB will be so successful they become the obvious pick---or maybe Clark leaves and they rapidly fade. No reason to gamble on a bland set of candidates where no single candidate really stands out. Just wait, remain patient, and see what develops. You may end up with an opportunity to add one of your top choices---or one of the current candidates may clearly distance themselves from the pack making them the obvious selection to all.

That’s fair. I do think though they fit the description better for what you’re looking for than most other teams in the other 4 conferences excluding Boise.

Don’t you need the waiver though for uneven divisions if you’re not playing a 10 game round robin since there are 11 teams?

No.
You can play division champs in a conference championship game, even with uneven divisions, so long as the divisions are as even as possible and you play round robin within each division.

Then I guess you wait until you see someone you like.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-24-2021 04:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 02:48 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 02:25 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 12:09 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-23-2021 10:53 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  There is no configuration that will make the AAC a P6 in the minds of the A5, even if it is unfair. That’s why I think AAC should add within their footprint and then they need to win and let their play do the talk. Sucks but that is how it will be and no amount of message board chatter will change it.

Lol...what footprint is that? AAC geography is a disaster and will always be so. Also, keep in mind, most of its current membership joined the conference with the expectation that it would be a nationwide conference stretching from San Diego to UConn.

The goal is simple. The goal is to create a better AAC with the open UConn slot. You can’t do that if you are limiting expansion to teams that look like the bottom of your conference rather then the top. Furthermore, the AAC would no doubt prefer a school that has high quality football AND basketball. There is also an entity named ESPN, who’s opinion seems to kind of matter on questions of brand and TV value.

Throwing academics and brand arguments aside, lets just begin with the problem that no single available eastern G5/Indy school is a top of the conference addition for both football AND basketball. Thus, adding any single eastern school as a full member is a non-starter.

That leaves a hybrid “split pick” option. Beyond a hybrid split pick of Army as a “football only” and someone like VCU as a “non-football” member—-I see no viable option in the east that comes anywhere even close to that. Not to mention, even that Army/VCU selection is not as strong as to me as a split invite featuring Boise “football only” mated to the same VCU “non-football” combo. That Boise/VCU combo seems like the best viable option for the AAC to make lemonade out of the lemons that resulted from the UConn departure.

A league being allowed to replace it’s worse team is actually a fairly rare opportunity. It’s imperative that the AAC capitalize on this rare opportunity by maximizing its positive impact on the league. Thus, if you can’t actually improve the league with the pick—the AAC is better off leaving the slot open until they have an addition that DOES improve the league.

I like the flow of your logic about where the AAC stands and what the goals should be with respect to the UConn open slot.

I think I slightly differ though about the conclusion. I was never happy with the Big East expanding with SDSU and Boise for football, I think a trans-continental conference is silly. So among the options you discuss, a split involving two eastern schools, such as Army for football and VCU for hoops, makes sense.

I don't think VCU can be improved upon for the hoops slot, but maybe Liberty would be a better add than Army for football. Maybe.

If limited to the Eastern half of the U.S. for an AAC football-only add, Liberty might be better than Army in terms of the potential to become a rather significant future "player" in college football with attendance, beating the big boys, sending men to the NFL, etc. The resources are there. I'm impressed with what Liberty has done in a brief time. In 10 to 20 years, Liberty could be vastly stronger than Army (notwithstanding history, tradition and beautiful stadium/setting).

Still, I would nonetheless prefer Army and VCU/Dayton to Liberty and VCU/Dayton. But Army is not interested.

If the AAC adds only one all-sports member in the Eastern half of the U.S. and looks at everything — academics, city location, respectable in football and hoops, TV market, history with American existing programs, long-term potential, etc. — there seemingly are only two options that make sense: Buffalo and UAB. UAB likely would have the edge.

Having noted this, and as AttackCoog accurately maintains, adding UAB would further the narrative of the AAC simply being a better version of its old C-USA self — and nothing more.

That is why, among many reasons, I would like the AAC to attempt to lure three programs from the Mountain West. If successful, that would give the league six schools (Navy, Temple, Wichita and the three MWC programs in this hypothetical) with no C-USA history.

Like with Coog, I follow your logic until the very end - if I agree that there is no split/combination or single school in the East or South that adds value, then I would prefer that the AAC foregoes expansion for the time being rather than go to the far west.

I agree. My post was driven by the possibility that the NCAA will require the American to add at least one school.

I wonder if there is a way to use a Notre Dame type deal with BYU as a way to balance the schedules with uneven divisions? Maybe that could include Navy counting its annual game with Air Force as one of its conference games.

(01-25-2021 08:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  I wonder if there is a way to use a Notre Dame type deal with BYU as a way to balance the schedules with uneven divisions? Maybe that could include Navy counting its annual game with Air Force as one of its conference games.

I guess you missed the answer to that option the other thousand times. No matter how much the AAC may want a particular program, they will be accepted as full and equal partners,,,,,sooo no special deal for BYU. A true blue blood that could pull the AAC into the power ranks like a Notre Dame (ain't happening) or a Texas (no way in hades) yes.

(01-25-2021 09:43 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  

(01-25-2021 08:25 AM)ken d Wrote:  I wonder if there is a way to use a Notre Dame type deal with BYU as a way to balance the schedules with uneven divisions? Maybe that could include Navy counting its annual game with Air Force as one of its conference games.

I guess you missed the answer to that option the other thousand times. No matter how much the AAC may want a particular program, they will be accepted as full and equal partners,,,,,sooo no special deal for BYU. A true blue blood that could pull the AAC into the power ranks like a Notre Dame (ain't happening) or a Texas (no way in hades) yes.

I didn't miss it at all. I'm not suggesting partial membership for BYU - just a scheduling arrangement for football only for the sole purpose of balancing conference schedules. This has nothing to do with pulling the AAC into power status because that simply isn't in the cards for them now or in the foreseeable future. Or did you miss that part the other thousand times it has been posted?

(01-24-2021 05:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 04:28 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  I guess I was thinking staying closer to the eastern U.S. than going as far west as Idaho.

I know they are C-USA but I feel UAB should be considered. They were C-USA when most of the AAC were, good academics, gives you the city of Birmingham, and solid football and basketball. Brings all sports which means you don’t need to find 2 teams to split with.

Edit: I understand the issue with perception though. The Sun Belt is still fighting being seen as the lowest conference even though they no longer are. I don’t think UAB hurts the brand though.

Regardless, add Boise and whoever for Olympic sports but it’s still only going to be seen as the best conference in the G5. Boise doesn’t change that perception.

UAB just doesnt have much of a brand. If a rather banal UAB type option represents the best the AAC can attract right now, I think the AAC would be wise to just leave the UConn slot open until a more attractive opportunity comes along.

I agree with this. Schools like UAB and Georgia State seem to be on the rise and have a lot of potential, but *right now* they aren't there yet, so right now, they should not be added.

Let them grow into that potential a bit more.

(01-26-2021 11:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 05:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 04:28 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  I guess I was thinking staying closer to the eastern U.S. than going as far west as Idaho.

I know they are C-USA but I feel UAB should be considered. They were C-USA when most of the AAC were, good academics, gives you the city of Birmingham, and solid football and basketball. Brings all sports which means you don’t need to find 2 teams to split with.

Edit: I understand the issue with perception though. The Sun Belt is still fighting being seen as the lowest conference even though they no longer are. I don’t think UAB hurts the brand though.

Regardless, add Boise and whoever for Olympic sports but it’s still only going to be seen as the best conference in the G5. Boise doesn’t change that perception.

UAB just doesnt have much of a brand. If a rather banal UAB type option represents the best the AAC can attract right now, I think the AAC would be wise to just leave the UConn slot open until a more attractive opportunity comes along.

I agree with this. Schools like UAB and Georgia State seem to be on the rise and have a lot of potential, but *right now* they aren't there yet, so right now, they should not be added.

Let them grow into that potential a bit more.

Agree. The reality is that they will likely NOT "grow into that potential". More likely these kind of flavor of the month programs will fade and someone else will rise into the spotlight for a year or two before fading and being supplanted....its simply the same phenomenon of rise and fall that has been the pattern for decades among these kinds of schools.

(01-26-2021 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 11:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 05:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 04:28 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  I guess I was thinking staying closer to the eastern U.S. than going as far west as Idaho.

I know they are C-USA but I feel UAB should be considered. They were C-USA when most of the AAC were, good academics, gives you the city of Birmingham, and solid football and basketball. Brings all sports which means you don’t need to find 2 teams to split with.

Edit: I understand the issue with perception though. The Sun Belt is still fighting being seen as the lowest conference even though they no longer are. I don’t think UAB hurts the brand though.

Regardless, add Boise and whoever for Olympic sports but it’s still only going to be seen as the best conference in the G5. Boise doesn’t change that perception.

UAB just doesnt have much of a brand. If a rather banal UAB type option represents the best the AAC can attract right now, I think the AAC would be wise to just leave the UConn slot open until a more attractive opportunity comes along.

I agree with this. Schools like UAB and Georgia State seem to be on the rise and have a lot of potential, but *right now* they aren't there yet, so right now, they should not be added.

Let them grow into that potential a bit more.

Agree. The reality is that they will likely NOT "grow into that potential". More likely these kind of flavor of the month programs will fade and someone else will rise into the spotlight for a few a year or two before fading and being supplanted....its simply the same phenomenon of rise and fall that has been the pattern for decades among these kinds of schools.

Coastal and Liberty in the Top 25 as an example?

(01-26-2021 03:11 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 01:19 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-26-2021 11:56 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 05:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(01-24-2021 04:28 PM)Troy_Fan_15 Wrote:  I guess I was thinking staying closer to the eastern U.S. than going as far west as Idaho.

I know they are C-USA but I feel UAB should be considered. They were C-USA when most of the AAC were, good academics, gives you the city of Birmingham, and solid football and basketball. Brings all sports which means you don’t need to find 2 teams to split with.

Edit: I understand the issue with perception though. The Sun Belt is still fighting being seen as the lowest conference even though they no longer are. I don’t think UAB hurts the brand though.

Regardless, add Boise and whoever for Olympic sports but it’s still only going to be seen as the best conference in the G5. Boise doesn’t change that perception.

UAB just doesnt have much of a brand. If a rather banal UAB type option represents the best the AAC can attract right now, I think the AAC would be wise to just leave the UConn slot open until a more attractive opportunity comes along.

I agree with this. Schools like UAB and Georgia State seem to be on the rise and have a lot of potential, but *right now* they aren't there yet, so right now, they should not be added.

Let them grow into that potential a bit more.

Agree. The reality is that they will likely NOT "grow into that potential". More likely these kind of flavor of the month programs will fade and someone else will rise into the spotlight for a few a year or two before fading and being supplanted....its simply the same phenomenon of rise and fall that has been the pattern for decades among these kinds of schools.

Coastal and Liberty in the Top 25 as an example?

Or Western Michigan?