Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
AAC Success
Author Message
GoOwls111 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,672
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 62
I Root For: Owls
Location: NYC
Post: #21
RE: AAC Success
(04-05-2021 05:01 PM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  
(04-05-2021 04:44 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  
(04-04-2021 11:44 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(04-04-2021 10:54 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  AAC members would like to join a P5 conference. The money in a P5 is very appealing. An invite is not likely for most if not all AAC schools. Hoping for the AAC to become P6 is dreaming of a coronation.

The P5 can and will prevent the AAC from becoming a P6. They don't want competition in money, recruiting, exposure, and status.

But, they can't prevent the AAC from obtaining these values.

How can the AAC accomplish these goals?

1. Alabama and Clemson might be added as members.
2. A huge tech company might decide to pay the AAC large amounts of money.
3. The ACC might take steps toward these goals.

Only the last idea has any potential.

Ideas for Obtaining More Money and Exposure.
1. Creation of an AAC bowl.
2. Pay based On viewership.

An AAC Bowl could be created by obtaining "seed" money from members.

AAC members might be rewarded or "punished" for levels of viewers.
The AAC could provide more of its contract money to schools with great
viewership and less to schools with poor viewership. If a school's
viewership is good it would get more money to grow it. If a school's
viewership is poor it would get less money. A member must spend
money to obtain good viewership or its going to lose money. Generally,
this would raise viewership of AAC members. Raised viewership would
get raised revenues from media companies. Capitalism works.

There are undoubtedly other ideas. All the AAC needs is leaders with
backbones. If they don't take these or other ideas to grow the conference they are deciding the AAC will not succeed.

The 2016 BigXII expansion traveshamockery proved one thing - no single AAC school (or the other mwc etc) was worth being pulled into the existing "P5" conference structure at $30 million per school - didn't bring that additive value to the table.
Followon - no AAC school (or the other mwc etc) will bring the additive value to the table when the discussions are at $50 million per school.

So "realignment" is dead -- as we've all understood it looking back at the last couple decades of conferences picking individual schools which could add enough value to their conference.

With those assumptions, we should look ahead to the next round of College Football Playoff negotiations in 2025-26 as "restructure" vice "realignment."

And that is when, why, and how the AAC Strategic Plan, and the "P6" information campaign came about after the 2016 BigXII expansion traveshamockery.

Rather than single schools getting that Willie Wonka Golden Ticket -- which we were all unworthy of at a much cheaper price than in the next round -- the conference and its institutions looked at elevating the conference as a whole. Let's make the conference be perceived as being worth inclusion in that next restructure.

Legally speaking, there are two differences between the SEC, Big10, BigXII, ACC, and PAC12; and the AAC, mwc, MAC, SunBelt, and CUSA. First off five of those conferences have autonomous status in terms of governance, recognized by the NCAA. And secondly, the CFP structure differentiates between five conferences (plus ND) having contract relationships with the bowls in the CFP arrangement and five conferences NOT being bowl-contract-conferences.

When the SEC, Big10, BigXII, ACC, and PAC12 gained their autonomy status within NCAA governance, the AAC had an immediate response: we will do everything the autonomous conferences do -- they may make their own rules and set their own standards, but we will play by those rules and meet those standards. Full cost of attendance is the easy example for that. The other four non-autonomous conferences may or may not step up to those standards, but the AAC and I don't care.
So on that first difference, we could either just keep pace, or ask to be added, whcih might get a "no" I suggest we are in good standing just keeping pace.

The real answer to the AAC reaching the strategic goal is in being on the inside looking out, instead of the outside looking in, in the next restructure of the College Football Playoff.
The good news is that that doesn't necessarily require the five autonomous or contract-bowl conferences giving up $ they already have. The AAC isn't asking for any of their current slice of the pie - just asking for a slice of a bigger future pie.

If the next CFP restructure were a four team playoff and six bowls, that's a steep climb: we need to convince the Cotton/Peach/Fiesta Bowls that they're better off having the AAC champ (that is, the AAC gaining a contract bowl with a CFP bowl) than risking a Western Michigan and low ratings, low attendance, lower money. That's a steep climb but possibly doable.
If the next CFP restrucuture is an eight team playoff and ten or twelve bowls, there are actually a few paths for AAC inclusion on the right side of that restructure. 5-3 with highest ranked five champs. 5-1-2 with or without some state preference for the AAC champ. Straight 8 for the playoff but an AAC champ contract to a Cotton/Peach/Fiesta/Citrus/Liberty/New Bowl in an 8-team 10/12-bowl CFP.

Could the AAC still be shutout as a contract-bowl participant in any new 8-team CFP restructure? Sure. But you miss every shot you don't take.
Could some sort of Oklahoma or Texas move lead to old-school "realignment" instead of "restructure" as I have as a planning assumption? Sure, but honestly that's the kind of tectonic shifts that you can't plan ahead for and just deal with when they come.

That's what "P6" and the AAC Strategic Plan are about -- position the conference as a whole (since everybody put on their fanciest dresses but still didn't get asked to dance by the BigXII in 2016) to be on the right side of the next restructure in a few more years.
(And that's also why there are only a couple of candidates for expansion that make us look more like a P6 than the other four in the interim, and we don't want to take any candidates who make us look worse for that strategic goal)

Texas and Oklahoma will never leave the BIG XII for the PAC, more likely 2-4 PAC leave fr the BIG XII.

Everyone on this board is always bashing the PAC as being the weakest and barely able to being considered one of the A-5 until some BIG XII leave to make room for the AAC to backfill.

Sorry but you are wrong. No team from the PAC would leave for the Big12. The PAC is more than just an athletic conference, is also an academic conference and none of those schools would leave that to go and be second fiddle to an athletic conference that is run by Texas with the LHN. Is the reason Colorado left for PAC, reason Nebraska and Texas AM left for other conferences.

Perhaps, but the Ivy League is more than an athetotic conference as well, but yet I don't any FBS University leaving for them either.

My point is that Texas and Oklahoma re not leaving the BIG XII for the PAC, other A-5 maybe, but not the PAC,
04-05-2021 05:25 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Cubanbull1 Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 155
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 13
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #22
RE: AAC Success
(04-05-2021 05:25 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  
(04-05-2021 05:01 PM)Cubanbull1 Wrote:  
(04-05-2021 04:44 PM)GoOwls111 Wrote:  
(04-04-2021 11:44 PM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  
(04-04-2021 10:54 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  AAC members would like to join a P5 conference. The money in a P5 is very appealing. An invite is not likely for most if not all AAC schools. Hoping for the AAC to become P6 is dreaming of a coronation.

The P5 can and will prevent the AAC from becoming a P6. They don't want competition in money, recruiting, exposure, and status.

But, they can't prevent the AAC from obtaining these values.

How can the AAC accomplish these goals?

1. Alabama and Clemson might be added as members.
2. A huge tech company might decide to pay the AAC large amounts of money.
3. The ACC might take steps toward these goals.

Only the last idea has any potential.

Ideas for Obtaining More Money and Exposure.
1. Creation of an AAC bowl.
2. Pay based On viewership.

An AAC Bowl could be created by obtaining "seed" money from members.

AAC members might be rewarded or "punished" for levels of viewers.
The AAC could provide more of its contract money to schools with great
viewership and less to schools with poor viewership. If a school's
viewership is good it would get more money to grow it. If a school's
viewership is poor it would get less money. A member must spend
money to obtain good viewership or its going to lose money. Generally,
this would raise viewership of AAC members. Raised viewership would
get raised revenues from media companies. Capitalism works.

There are undoubtedly other ideas. All the AAC needs is leaders with
backbones. If they don't take these or other ideas to grow the conference they are deciding the AAC will not succeed.

The 2016 BigXII expansion traveshamockery proved one thing - no single AAC school (or the other mwc etc) was worth being pulled into the existing "P5" conference structure at $30 million per school - didn't bring that additive value to the table.
Followon - no AAC school (or the other mwc etc) will bring the additive value to the table when the discussions are at $50 million per school.

So "realignment" is dead -- as we've all understood it looking back at the last couple decades of conferences picking individual schools which could add enough value to their conference.

With those assumptions, we should look ahead to the next round of College Football Playoff negotiations in 2025-26 as "restructure" vice "realignment."

And that is when, why, and how the AAC Strategic Plan, and the "P6" information campaign came about after the 2016 BigXII expansion traveshamockery.

Rather than single schools getting that Willie Wonka Golden Ticket -- which we were all unworthy of at a much cheaper price than in the next round -- the conference and its institutions looked at elevating the conference as a whole. Let's make the conference be perceived as being worth inclusion in that next restructure.

Legally speaking, there are two differences between the SEC, Big10, BigXII, ACC, and PAC12; and the AAC, mwc, MAC, SunBelt, and CUSA. First off five of those conferences have autonomous status in terms of governance, recognized by the NCAA. And secondly, the CFP structure differentiates between five conferences (plus ND) having contract relationships with the bowls in the CFP arrangement and five conferences NOT being bowl-contract-conferences.

When the SEC, Big10, BigXII, ACC, and PAC12 gained their autonomy status within NCAA governance, the AAC had an immediate response: we will do everything the autonomous conferences do -- they may make their own rules and set their own standards, but we will play by those rules and meet those standards. Full cost of attendance is the easy example for that. The other four non-autonomous conferences may or may not step up to those standards, but the AAC and I don't care.
So on that first difference, we could either just keep pace, or ask to be added, whcih might get a "no" I suggest we are in good standing just keeping pace.

The real answer to the AAC reaching the strategic goal is in being on the inside looking out, instead of the outside looking in, in the next restructure of the College Football Playoff.
The good news is that that doesn't necessarily require the five autonomous or contract-bowl conferences giving up $ they already have. The AAC isn't asking for any of their current slice of the pie - just asking for a slice of a bigger future pie.

If the next CFP restructure were a four team playoff and six bowls, that's a steep climb: we need to convince the Cotton/Peach/Fiesta Bowls that they're better off having the AAC champ (that is, the AAC gaining a contract bowl with a CFP bowl) than risking a Western Michigan and low ratings, low attendance, lower money. That's a steep climb but possibly doable.
If the next CFP restrucuture is an eight team playoff and ten or twelve bowls, there are actually a few paths for AAC inclusion on the right side of that restructure. 5-3 with highest ranked five champs. 5-1-2 with or without some state preference for the AAC champ. Straight 8 for the playoff but an AAC champ contract to a Cotton/Peach/Fiesta/Citrus/Liberty/New Bowl in an 8-team 10/12-bowl CFP.

Could the AAC still be shutout as a contract-bowl participant in any new 8-team CFP restructure? Sure. But you miss every shot you don't take.
Could some sort of Oklahoma or Texas move lead to old-school "realignment" instead of "restructure" as I have as a planning assumption? Sure, but honestly that's the kind of tectonic shifts that you can't plan ahead for and just deal with when they come.

That's what "P6" and the AAC Strategic Plan are about -- position the conference as a whole (since everybody put on their fanciest dresses but still didn't get asked to dance by the BigXII in 2016) to be on the right side of the next restructure in a few more years.
(And that's also why there are only a couple of candidates for expansion that make us look more like a P6 than the other four in the interim, and we don't want to take any candidates who make us look worse for that strategic goal)

Texas and Oklahoma will never leave the BIG XII for the PAC, more likely 2-4 PAC leave fr the BIG XII.

Everyone on this board is always bashing the PAC as being the weakest and barely able to being considered one of the A-5 until some BIG XII leave to make room for the AAC to backfill.

Sorry but you are wrong. No team from the PAC would leave for the Big12. The PAC is more than just an athletic conference, is also an academic conference and none of those schools would leave that to go and be second fiddle to an athletic conference that is run by Texas with the LHN. Is the reason Colorado left for PAC, reason Nebraska and Texas AM left for other conferences.

Perhaps, but the Ivy League is more than an athetotic conference as well, but yet I don't any FBS University leaving for them either.

My point is that Texas and Oklahoma re not leaving the BIG XII for the PAC, other A-5 maybe, but not the PAC,

Understand and agree with you regarding Texas and OU, but I disagree with you in regards to any PAC school leaving for Big12.
04-05-2021 06:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,321
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 145
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #23
RE: AAC Success
(04-05-2021 02:52 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  having an *** Official *** G5 bowl would be a huge step forward into cultivating more eyeballs or as some have said a AAC bowl, sooner the better

Since we all seem to agree on this point, let's consider what exactly would happen if the AAC schools pony up the cash to create the next great (NY6-like) annual bowl game classic.

To make such an enterprise worthwhile, these are the criteria that would have to be met for a major AAC-sponsored bowl game to be worthwhile:

1) It would have to be branded like a NY6 bowl game and played between Dec. 30th and January 2nd, optimally on the 31st or prime time on the 2nd.

2) It would have to be held in a major stadium in a large southern city that doesn't currently host a major bowl game, with excellent FB facilities, such as Austin, TX (100,119 seat Darrell Royal Stadium), San Francisco (Oakland Colliseum or Stanford Stadium), or Las Vegas (NFL Raiders' Stadium 70,000 capacity).

3) It would have to match a highly ranked team from one of the highest-profile FB schools (that don't play in a NY6 bowl game) up against the highest-ranked AAC team that doesn't play a NY6 bowl game.

4) It would have to be scheduled during at an optimal viewing time on a major network.

5) It would need to have a major corporate sponsor, to ensure sufficient media hype to guarantee a large audience.

Would a bowl with those characteristics meet all of these necessary criteria, which would have to be meet to make it worthwhile?

.

In 2020, the likely opponents would have been #24 Tulsa vs. one of the following:

#11 Indiana (not a national FB brand), #12 Coastal (too G4-ish), #13 UNC (ok), #14 Northweastern (ok), #15 Iowa (good), #16 BYU (ok/good), #17 USC (good), #18 Miami (good), #20 Texas (good).

Others on the list would have been #19 Louisiana, #21 Oklahoma St., #22 SJSU, and #23 NC State.

.

In 2019, #21 Cincy would have played one of these teams:

#11 Utah (ok), #12 Auburn (great), #13 Alabama (great), #14 Michigan (great), #15 Notre Dame (great), or #16 Iowa (good).

Others on the list would have included #18 Minnesota, #19 Boise St., #20 App. St., & #22 USC.

.

I'm not convinced that a Tulsa-Texas or Tulsa-Miami game would have done enough for the conference to make it worthwhile. It seems likely that such a game - if broadcast at an optimal time - might generate viewership in the 3 or 4 million range, maybe more if they went into the 4th quarter - - which is not to suggest that Tulsa vs. Texas, Miami, or USC certainly wouldn't have been very watchable games - they might have been interesting games.

However, on the other hand, the potential 2019-20 games would have been pretty great!

#21 Cincinnati vs. #12 Auburn, #13 Alabama, #14 Michigan, or #15 Notre Dame could have generated fairly mind-boggling viewership.


.

It would be interesting to check what the matchups would have been in 2017-18 and 2018-19 - - would they be amazing, or just ok?

The proposal may have potential if most of the bowl games would be a top 20 AAC team vs. a top 20 FB legend.

to be continued...

.
(This post was last modified: 04-05-2021 06:29 PM by jedclampett.)
04-05-2021 06:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HoustonRocks Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,058
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 30
I Root For: HoustonCougars
Location:
Post: #24
RE: AAC Success
The AAC can increase its viewership to be better than P5 conferences if it implements selected activities.

The new ESPN contract plus other revenue sources means each AAC full member will receive $8-10 million per year. A fraction of that should be used to grow the AAC.

Suppose each full member provides $500,000 annually for creation of a bowl. It would accumulate $27.5 million in 5 years, sufficient to create a bowl. "The bowls played before New Year’s typically sell their naming rights for $500,000 to $1 million annually. The bowl could pay each participating school $1 million, sufficient to say "The AAC is Big Time". It would provide exposure for the AAC and considerable separation from the G4.

Suppose each full member provides $500,000 for advertising games before they appear on TV. It would provide $5.5 million annually
for advertising, sufficient for the AAC to advertise a game of the week.

The AAC needs to consistently provide greater numbers of viewers than several P5 conferences. The AAC does not need a great increase to achieve that goal. It is entirely possible except for high level P5 games. A UH-Memphis game won't get more viewers than UT-OU but it would certainly outdraw TCU-KSU. UCF-USF would probably outdraw UT-OU.

If the AAC consistently provides more income to ESPN than the Big-12 why would ESPN provide less money to the AAC? Competition would ensure it doesn't.

These activities can be implemented while each full member still
receives much more than it does currently. They would more than compensate each full member in the long term.
04-06-2021 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 39,078
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 1263
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #25
RE: AAC Success
(04-04-2021 10:54 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  Ideas for Obtaining More Money and Exposure.

1. Creation of an AAC bowl.

This has been floated before but I just don't know how we get there. Where is the money going to come from to make this bowl a big deal?

And even if money is found, why would a P5 conference want to commit a team to it?

Just doesn't compute for me.

07-coffee3
04-06-2021 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
geosnooker2000 Offline
I got Cleopatra in the basement
*

Posts: 22,218
Joined: Aug 2006
Reputation: 950
I Root For: Tiger Football
Location: Somerville, TN
Post: #26
RE: AAC Success
(04-06-2021 09:19 AM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  Suppose each full member provides $500,000 annually for creation of a bowl. It would accumulate $27.5 million in 5 years, sufficient to create a bowl. "The bowls played before New Year’s typically sell their naming rights for $500,000 to $1 million annually. The bowl could pay each participating school $1 million, sufficient to say "The AAC is Big Time". It would provide exposure for the AAC and considerable separation from the G4.

We nearly have that now in the Birmingham bowl (+/- $700,000 per team). If you want to say "The AAC is now Big Time", we are gonna need $4MM per team payout. That is a NYD bowl level payout. Hell, even the Gator Bowl pays out $3.25MM per team. The Music City Bowl pays $2.5MM+ per.

This is not just about money, as others have alluded to. This is about how well it is produced, as well as being a slick devil on working out WHEN it would be played, and getting it on the biggest OTA platform possible. And as usual, it would be more accepted by the public as legit if we took over a bowl with an historic origin instead of "up-starting" one from scratch. Personally, I think we need to get a tie-in to the Music City Bowl as a stepping stone to this process.
04-06-2021 12:02 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
goodknightfl Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,955
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 297
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #27
RE: AAC Success
Agree the AAC needs to step up its bowl presence. But I don't see any good ways to do this, Other than keep on keeping on. First step is simply getting a mid level bowl to take the best AAC available over an #6 or 7 P5 school. not sure how you pull that off, when the bowls would rather have the #6 or 7 P5 school.
04-13-2021 09:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fishpro10987 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,000
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 71
I Root For: Temple
Location: Eugene, OR
Post: #28
RE: AAC Success
(04-13-2021 09:01 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Agree the AAC needs to step up its bowl presence. But I don't see any good ways to do this, Other than keep on keeping on. First step is simply getting a mid level bowl to take the best AAC available over an #6 or 7 P5 school. not sure how you pull that off, when the bowls would rather have the #6 or 7 P5 school.

Traveling fan base dictates bowl selections. This is where the P5 has us beat.
04-13-2021 10:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 10,694
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 403
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #29
RE: AAC Success
(04-13-2021 10:41 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 09:01 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Agree the AAC needs to step up its bowl presence. But I don't see any good ways to do this, Other than keep on keeping on. First step is simply getting a mid level bowl to take the best AAC available over an #6 or 7 P5 school. not sure how you pull that off, when the bowls would rather have the #6 or 7 P5 school.

Traveling fan base dictates bowl selections. This is where the P5 has us beat.

That’s what these posters don’t understand. They don’t get that Iowa brings 30k fans to bowl games in Arizona. Temple brings no fans to away games. This conference is horrible when it comes to away games. UCF to USF has been impressive, but every game needs to be like that.
04-13-2021 04:01 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GoOwls111 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,672
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 62
I Root For: Owls
Location: NYC
Post: #30
RE: AAC Success
Before we start to dream about bigger Bowls with Bigger pay, can we as a conference, start to win the bowl games we currently play in?

Going 2-6 or 2-5 will not make the AAC attractive to better bowl alignment.
04-13-2021 04:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JHS55 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,363
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 122
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #31
RE: AAC Success
AAC needs a bowl with lots of money, mybe we can get the g4 to pay a million per conference, that’s four million right there, they might do it if we pat them on the head and say one day you might get to play in it, you know just like the A5 dose us
04-13-2021 04:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HoustonRocks Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,058
Joined: Jul 2013
Reputation: 30
I Root For: HoustonCougars
Location:
Post: #32
RE: AAC Success
"The American Conference Game of The Week".

or perhaps:

"The American Game of The Week".

Rings bells across the country.

Advertising pays.
(This post was last modified: 04-13-2021 06:24 PM by HoustonRocks.)
04-13-2021 06:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
jedclampett Online
All American
*

Posts: 3,321
Joined: Jul 2019
Reputation: 145
I Root For: Temple
Location:
Post: #33
RE: AAC Success
(04-06-2021 09:39 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-04-2021 10:54 PM)HoustonRocks Wrote:  Ideas for Obtaining More Money and Exposure.

1. Creation of an AAC bowl.

This has been floated before but I just don't know how we get there. Where is the money going to come from to make this bowl a big deal?

And even if money is found, why would a P5 conference want to commit a team to it?

It's not even slightly hard to imagine.

The money could come from the increased revenue that the AAC schools are getting from ESPN, if they would be willing to set aside $1 to $2 million dollars per school to make such a bowl game possible.

The new AAC bowl would have all the features of a NY6 bowl, and the top-ranked AAC team not in the NY6 bowl would play a P5 team that (a) doesn't play in a NY6 bowl, (b) was ranked in the top 25, and © has a national "brand" guaranteed to generate high viewership.

In 2019, such a game could have had #20 Navy playing one of these teams in a location such as Las Vegas, the SF Bay area, or Austin, TX on December 31st or January 2nd:

#12 Notre Dame

#13 Baylor

#14 Auburn

#15 Iowa

#18 Michigan

#25 Texas

.

The offer would have gone to Notre Dame first, etc., and then to the other teams, until one accepted the invitation. One of these 6 P5 teams would have agreed to play if the compensation was high enough, and if the game was hyped sufficiently in the media.

It might be necessary to pay the P5 team ~$2 million or thereabouts, but the viewership would probably be sufficient to make the bowl profitable for the AAC.

Feasibility studies would have to be conducted to make sure that this would be a worthwhile investment.

.
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2021 08:20 AM by jedclampett.)
04-14-2021 08:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Offline
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 3,588
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 249
I Root For: VUMemIUDePaulNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #34
RE: AAC Success
(04-13-2021 10:41 AM)Fishpro10987 Wrote:  
(04-13-2021 09:01 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  Agree the AAC needs to step up its bowl presence. But I don't see any good ways to do this, Other than keep on keeping on. First step is simply getting a mid level bowl to take the best AAC available over an #6 or 7 P5 school. not sure how you pull that off, when the bowls would rather have the #6 or 7 P5 school.

Traveling fan base dictates bowl selections. This is where the P5 has us beat.


You are correct, FPro.
04-14-2021 08:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.