Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
Author Message
PicksUp Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,914
Joined: Mar 2018
Reputation: 135
I Root For: UTEP, Texas
Location:
Post: #21
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 12:23 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-16-2021 12:09 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 09:49 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  What this shows is what most of the AAC has been saying, we are a tweener conference closer to the A5 than the four below, and if you do it from 2015 till now I bet it would be even more clear. ...

Yeah, where the argument comes a cropper is if it moves from claims that can be backed, like "the AAC is on average the strongest among the non-contract-bowl conferences" or "the AAC is on average the strongest among the Group of Five" to claims that are objective false, like referring to the Group of Five other than the AAC as the G4 or referring to the six strongest FBS conferences as the P6.

I would, indeed, be happy if it was the Group of Four, and the MAC champion only had to compete against the Sunbelt, CUSA and MWC champion for the Access Bowl spot, and if those four conferences split the ~$90m in CFP money four ways instead of five ways. But every time an AAC fan raises my hopes by using the G4 term ...

... that the AAC has decided to turn its back on the race for the Access Bowl and has handed its share of the Go5 money back to be split amongst the rest of us ...

... my hopes are dashed, as it turns out they have not actually left the group that has the rights to those things under the CFP contract.

Lol

No, 3+6=9 and so does 4+5.

There is no argument to be had, the AAC is closer to the A5 (an actual NCAA term) then they are to any non-A5 conference. With the AAC having already surpassed one A5 conference in basketball and football. Something no other non-A5 conference has been close to doing. With the new CFP rules there is no access bowl and with that letter the AAC has made it clear they will get autonomy.

Im sure the 30-35m per school media deal will soon follow.
06-16-2021 05:04 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #22
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 04:27 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  
(06-16-2021 03:43 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  
(06-16-2021 02:28 AM)Erictelevision Wrote:  Ken's data ALSO tells me that BSU should be in a P5 conference.

Ball State? They are 130th. Perhaps you mean a different BSU.

The Go5 school REALLY in amongst the P5 schools is ECU. The P5 schools in amongst the Go5 schools between 25,000 and 35,000 are a set of four classy private schools, Wazzu and Kansas.

There are another 5-6 schools that average 35-40,000 whose attendance are augmented by massive traveling fan bases. Northwestern averaged 37,000 fans a game in 2019: how many of those were OSU and Michigan State fans? I went to a game at Northwestern-OSU game once several years ago with my wife and half the stadium was wearing Scarlet and Gray.

For what it's worth, the numbers in the link are the average for 2014-19.
06-16-2021 06:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #23
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-15-2021 09:49 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.

Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)

SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)

It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.

10 years seems unfair. The AAC has only existed for 7 seasons. 6 with Navy and one of the lowest performers has been gone for two seasons.

What this shows is what most of the AAC has been saying, we are a tweener conference closer to the A5 than the four below, and if you do it from 2015 till now I bet it would be even more clear. What the AAC lacks is one or two top 25 programs. UCF seems to be emerging as one, Cincinnati has previously been one, and seems on track to returning. Memphis has shown some signs they could become that type program.

The AAC as a conference has only existed for 7 seasons, but their current members have been playing a lot longer than that. I chose 10 years because conference membership shouldn't be based on flash in the pan results. Once you add a school it is virtually forever.

Here are more ways to look at this data.

Median power rank:

SEC...25
B12...27
PAC...36
B1G...39
ACC...43
AAC...70
MWC..88
MAC..103
SBC..105
USA..107

% of members in top 75:

SEC....100
ACC....100
PAC......92
B12......90
B1G......79
AAC......55
MWC.....33
MAC......17
SBC......10
USA........7

As for the argument that the AAC is closer to the weakest P5 conference than it is to the next strongest G5 conference, this data doesn't support that.

For the AAC to move up in any of these rankings, it is necessary that some P5 conference moves down. That is to say, some schools that enjoy the resource advantage that comes with being in a P5 conference will have to get consistently worse on the field over time while schools in the AAC will have to continue to get consistently better over time, but not so much better that they get "promoted" to an expanding P5 conference.

It could happen, but the chances of that happening in my lifetime are slim to none. So, instead of accepting that the AAC is going to be in the bottom half of the FBS conferences, perhaps they should brag that they are in the third quintile. That sounds a lot better.
06-16-2021 06:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Yosef Himself Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,959
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 470
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #24
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
You chose 10 years but the SBC has only 4 years into its current lineup. And had another huge rearranging 7 years ago. Not to mention Idaho/NMSU were huge drags on any meaningful rankings
06-16-2021 06:57 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JTApps1 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,957
Joined: Feb 2011
Reputation: 144
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #25
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-15-2021 09:02 PM)ken d Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 08:44 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 07:59 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Using the same link where I looked at whether the AAC plus BYU looked like a power conference .....

This may surprise you, but the main takeaway I have from this data is that the MAC should probably be reclassified as an FCS conference. It really doesn't look like an FBS conference at all.

In their defense, neither do the Belt and CUSA.

Both conferences are well ahead of the FCS leagues. Most FCS schools struggle to approach 10k fans for their best games these days.
06-16-2021 08:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bill dazzle Online
Craft beer and urban living enthusiast
*

Posts: 10,388
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 948
I Root For: Vandy/Memphis/DePaul/UNC
Location: Nashville
Post: #26
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
Looking at it objectively, the AAC seems squarely in the middle of the P5 and the grouping of the other four G5. It truly is a tweener.
06-16-2021 08:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tigersmoke4 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,507
Joined: Oct 2017
Reputation: 97
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #27
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.

Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)

SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)

It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.

Is this a reliable data point considering that the AAC is only 8 years old. No disrespect intended just asking.
06-16-2021 08:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,106
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #28
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 08:21 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.

Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)

SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)

It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.

Is this a reliable data point considering that the AAC is only 8 years old. No disrespect intended just asking.

Depends on whether your theory is that schools make the conference or your theory is that the conference makes the schools. On the first theory, when the conference is formed shouldn't matter. On the second, it should.

An econometrician who dabbled in non-parametric measures might suggest taking the last five years ... except excluding 2020 as an outlier, so 2015-2019 ... and see if it makes a substantial difference to the results.

Of course, with a growing FBS, an econometrician who dabbled with non-parametric measures might suggest using Quartiles instead of by top x*25.
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2021 09:01 AM by BruceMcF.)
06-16-2021 08:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Foreverandever Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,861
Joined: Aug 2018
Reputation: 446
I Root For: &
Location:
Post: #29
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 06:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 09:49 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.

Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)

SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)

It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.

10 years seems unfair. The AAC has only existed for 7 seasons. 6 with Navy and one of the lowest performers has been gone for two seasons.

What this shows is what most of the AAC has been saying, we are a tweener conference closer to the A5 than the four below, and if you do it from 2015 till now I bet it would be even more clear. What the AAC lacks is one or two top 25 programs. UCF seems to be emerging as one, Cincinnati has previously been one, and seems on track to returning. Memphis has shown some signs they could become that type program.

The AAC as a conference has only existed for 7 seasons, but their current members have been playing a lot longer than that. I chose 10 years because conference membership shouldn't be based on flash in the pan results. Once you add a school it is virtually forever.

Here are more ways to look at this data.

Median power rank:

SEC...25
B12...27
PAC...36
B1G...39
ACC...43
AAC...70
MWC..88
MAC..103
SBC..105
USA..107

% of members in top 75:

SEC....100
ACC....100
PAC......92
B12......90
B1G......79
AAC......55
MWC.....33
MAC......17
SBC......10
USA........7

As for the argument that the AAC is closer to the weakest P5 conference than it is to the next strongest G5 conference, this data doesn't support that.


For the AAC to move up in any of these rankings, it is necessary that some P5 conference moves down. That is to say, some schools that enjoy the resource advantage that comes with being in a P5 conference will have to get consistently worse on the field over time while schools in the AAC will have to continue to get consistently better over time, but not so much better that they get "promoted" to an expanding P5 conference.

It could happen, but the chances of that happening in my lifetime are slim to none. So, instead of accepting that the AAC is going to be in the bottom half of the FBS conferences, perhaps they should brag that they are in the third quintile. That sounds a lot better.


So because some of the teams played together before (Some in the Big East, some in CUSA, one as an independent) that means you can just lump them together? Ah no.

It's also why Boise looks soooooo good. Boise did great until the CFP was installed and the AAC was formed. Since 2015 when Navy joined the AAC Boise has been consistently behind one and often two AAC teams while not even finishing ranked several times.

Kind of done with this discussion when you intentionally go back to before the AAC formed.ro include stats. Not sure there is a more clear biased framing than that.

The bolded sentence kind of locks in the bias. Your own stats show that statistically speaking the AAC is closer to a p5 than it is to a g4. Maybe it isn't p5 but it is closer to that than it is to the g4 and that's with you using three worthless years of data.
06-16-2021 09:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #30
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 08:21 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.

Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)

SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)

It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.

Is this a reliable data point considering that the AAC is only 8 years old. No disrespect intended just asking.

These aren't measures of how any conference performed during this period. They are measures of how the individual teams in the current membership of each conference performed. Someone mentioned Idaho and New Mexico State being a drag on Sunbelt numbers, but they weren't in the numbers because they are no longer in the conference. Conversely, if BYU were to join a conference, their performance numbers for the preceding 10 years would be included in their new conference's total.

If you try to get numbers for comparison of conferences as they are configured today by using the different configurations each conference may have had over ten years, the "averages" would basically be a hash total.

By using current membership, it's easy to calculate the impact of realignment on both gaining and losing conferences, using data that's readily available and consistent from one year to the next. And by using ten years of data for each school, it's harder to cherry pick the time period that's most advantageous to whatever argument you are making.

So, yes, the AAC's performance in the past five years is better than its ten year performance. They went from a ten year average power rating of 67 to a five tear average of 68 (compared to the weakest P5 which tends to hover around 75). But over the span of just a few seasons, UCF went from a regular season record of 12-0 to one of 0-12. Depending on what short period of time you might choose, you can make them look much better or much worse. The longer time period of ten years virtually eliminates the impact of a single season's performance good or bad. And if you are looking at realignment, you need to be looking at data that isn't skewed by the potential impact of a single transcendent player or coach.
06-16-2021 09:22 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #31
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 08:21 AM)Tigersmoke4 Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.

Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)

SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)

It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.

Is this a reliable data point considering that the AAC is only 8 years old. No disrespect intended just asking.

The AAC's newness is a mark against them, not a positive talking point. Part of the value of the B1G and SEC etc is that your granddaddy brought you to the games / watched them with you when you were little.

In 10 years, Texas Tech and Syracuse and UCLA aren't going anywhere. You can't say the same about the AAC's success. MAAAYBE the top of the AAC stays strong and you have 2-3 consistent top 25 teams, and make a playoff run every 3-5 years. Or maybe UCF's next coach is a dummy and their trajectory looks like Marshall's over the last 20 years.
06-16-2021 09:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #32
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 08:58 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Of course, with a growing FBS, an econometrician who dabbled with non-parametric measures might suggest using Quartiles instead of by top x*25.

That would make a lot of sense, actually, with 128 FBS teams. 4 quartiles of 64.
06-16-2021 09:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #33
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 06:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 09:49 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  
(06-15-2021 08:58 PM)ken d Wrote:  Interesting way to look at conferences. Using the 10 year average Sagarin strength rating for each school in the same groups of 25, this is what you get.

Conf...1-25...26-50...51-75...76-100...101+...Best (school)

SEC......7........5..........2..........0...........0........1 (Alabama)
B12......5........3..........1..........0...........1........4 (Oklahoma)
B1G......5........3..........3..........3...........0........2 (Ohio State)
PAC......4........5..........2...........1..........0........6 (Oregon)
ACC......2........7..........5...........0..........0........3 (Clemson)
AAC......0........1..........7...........4..........1........48 (UCF)
MWC.....1........0..........3...........4..........4........25 (Boise State)
MAC......0........0..........2...........4..........6........63 (Toledo)
SUN......0........0..........1...........4..........5........75 (Appalachian St)
USA......0........0..........1...........4..........9........73 (Louisiana Tech)

It seems any way you slice it, the AAC is clearly not P5 and just as clearly the strongest G5.

10 years seems unfair. The AAC has only existed for 7 seasons. 6 with Navy and one of the lowest performers has been gone for two seasons.

What this shows is what most of the AAC has been saying, we are a tweener conference closer to the A5 than the four below, and if you do it from 2015 till now I bet it would be even more clear. What the AAC lacks is one or two top 25 programs. UCF seems to be emerging as one, Cincinnati has previously been one, and seems on track to returning. Memphis has shown some signs they could become that type program.

The AAC as a conference has only existed for 7 seasons, but their current members have been playing a lot longer than that. I chose 10 years because conference membership shouldn't be based on flash in the pan results. Once you add a school it is virtually forever.

Here are more ways to look at this data.

Median power rank:

SEC...25
B12...27
PAC...36
B1G...39
ACC...43
AAC...70
MWC..88
MAC..103
SBC..105
USA..107

% of members in top 75:

SEC....100
ACC....100
PAC......92
B12......90
B1G......79
AAC......55
MWC.....33
MAC......17
SBC......10
USA........7

As for the argument that the AAC is closer to the weakest P5 conference than it is to the next strongest G5 conference, this data doesn't support that.

For the AAC to move up in any of these rankings, it is necessary that some P5 conference moves down. That is to say, some schools that enjoy the resource advantage that comes with being in a P5 conference will have to get consistently worse on the field over time while schools in the AAC will have to continue to get consistently better over time, but not so much better that they get "promoted" to an expanding P5 conference.

It could happen, but the chances of that happening in my lifetime are slim to none. So, instead of accepting that the AAC is going to be in the bottom half of the FBS conferences, perhaps they should brag that they are in the third quintile. That sounds a lot better.
There are really 3 tiers. AAC and MWC are more like each other than they are the A5 or the other 3.

Its 18 from SEC to ACC. Its 27 from ACC to AAC. Its 18 from AAC to MWC. Its 15 to 19 from MWC to the rest.
06-16-2021 09:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #34
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 09:31 AM)johnbragg Wrote:  
(06-16-2021 08:58 AM)BruceMcF Wrote:  Of course, with a growing FBS, an econometrician who dabbled with non-parametric measures might suggest using Quartiles instead of by top x*25.

That would make a lot of sense, actually, with 128 FBS teams. 4 quartiles of 64.

Or four quartiles of 32.

But earlier I used quintiles instead of quartiles so that the AAC would be in the middle quintile.
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2021 09:37 AM by ken d.)
06-16-2021 09:35 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
johnbragg Online
Five Minute Google Expert
*

Posts: 16,359
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation: 996
I Root For: St Johns
Location:
Post: #35
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 09:19 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  Kind of done with this discussion when you intentionally go back to before the AAC formed.ro include stats. Not sure there is a more clear biased framing than that.

Wut? This is college football, where traditions and dusty banners are pretty important. Forget 10 years, it would make sense to pull and use 25 year average data or even 50 years. SMU and Houston and Rice still get sometimes thought of as "former SWC schools" which they can lord over North Texas etc. Tulane still gets a little bit of benefit from having been in the SEC in the 1960s and going to major bowls in the 30s.
06-16-2021 09:41 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,299
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #36
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
From an academic standpoint, in terms of research, however, the AAC does look a lot like the P5. Most of their members are Tier I and many are tougher to get admitted to than many of the Big 12 and SEC schools.
06-16-2021 09:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,106
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #37
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 09:33 AM)bullet Wrote:  There are really 3 tiers. AAC and MWC are more like each other than they are the A5 or the other 3.

Its 18 from SEC to ACC. Its 27 from ACC to AAC. Its 18 from AAC to MWC. Its 15 to 19 from MWC to the rest.

Which, strategically, points to the AAC's other potentially effective option, which is to form a "Group of 2" with the MWC to negotiate as a group, and leave the CUSA, SBC and MAC to negotiate as a "Group of 3". The "Group of 2" would demand as much or more as the Group of 3 gets, the Group of 3 would argue for equal splits per conference, the P5 get to divide and conquer and end up giving ALL of them less than they would have received with a common front.

HOWEVER if the "Group of Two" strategy works, the AAC would have a not unreasonable prospect of being "money talks, BS walks" accorded a higher status than a majority of its former Group-of-Five-mates in the CFP allotments.

The problem with just going in and negotiating on its own account is that from political footballing either within the NCAA to get the extra games allowance or outside the NCAA to ensure that it is not tested for being a restraint of trade against the public interest, even if on average the AAC schools may carry a little more clout inside the NCAA, it's more like making up for the missing school than four times the clout per school of the MWC, CUSA, SBC and MAC combined, so if it's the AAC on its own against a Group of Four, the AAC could end up getting rolled, and getting the equivalent of one fourth of what the Group of Four get, without the current power rankings bonuses it gets as a concession within the Group of Five.
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2021 10:14 AM by BruceMcF.)
06-16-2021 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Michael in Raleigh Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,633
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 325
I Root For: App State
Location:
Post: #38
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
I guess it depends on one's point of view on whether the AAC is closer to the A5 than the other G5.

On the one hand, the difference between the lowest per-school P5 conference-distributed revenue and the AAC's is around $30 million, while the difference between the AAC's conference-distributed revenue and the lowest G5 is about $6.5 million. So, in that regard, AAC distributions are closer to other G5's.

On the other hand, AAC distributions are a good 14X that of the lowest G5 (at least for media distributions), whereas the lowest P5 distribution is just 5 or 6X that of the AAC. So I suppose that is argument in favor of the AAC being closer to the P5.

It's the strongest behind the P5. No doubt about it.
06-16-2021 10:15 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BruceMcF Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 13,106
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 760
I Root For: Reds/Buckeyes/.
Location:
Post: #39
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 10:15 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  I guess it depends on one's point of view on whether the AAC is closer to the A5 than the other G5.

On the one hand, the difference between the lowest per-school P5 conference-distributed revenue and the AAC's is around $30 million, while the difference between the AAC's conference-distributed revenue and the lowest G5 is about $6.5 million. So, in that regard, AAC distributions are closer to other G5's.

On the other hand, AAC distributions are a good 14X that of the lowest G5 (at least for media distributions), whereas the lowest P5 distribution is just 5 or 6X that of the AAC. So I suppose that is argument in favor of the AAC being closer to the P5.

It's the strongest behind the P5. No doubt about it.

That's an empirically biased test. If you want to test against the lowest P5, your other side should be the 2nd highest Go5. If you want to test against the lowest Go5, your other side should be the highest P5.

If someone wants to make the case for breaking up the Go5 into the Go2 and the Go3, that median power ranking is a starting point for that case:
(06-16-2021 06:51 AM)ken d Wrote:  ...Median power rank:

SEC...25
B12...27
PAC...36
B1G...39
ACC...43
AAC...70
MWC..88
MAC..103
SBC..105
USA..107
...

As noted previously, AAC to lowest P5 is +27, MWC to AAC is +18.
AAC to the highest P5 is +45, the bottom of the Go5 to the AAC is +37.

Darn, still closer to the "rest of our group" side.

But while the AAC to the lowest P5 is not going to budge from +27, the top of the hypothetical "Group of Three" to the AAC is +33. So by sliding the MWC into their own middle group, the AAC can rig a comparison that makes them closer to the P5 than somebody.
(This post was last modified: 06-16-2021 10:40 AM by BruceMcF.)
06-16-2021 10:28 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,012
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #40
RE: I say something nice about the AAC: Very clearly ahead of other G5s.
(06-16-2021 10:15 AM)Michael in Raleigh Wrote:  I guess it depends on one's point of view on whether the AAC is closer to the A5 than the other G5.

On the one hand, the difference between the lowest per-school P5 conference-distributed revenue and the AAC's is around $30 million, while the difference between the AAC's conference-distributed revenue and the lowest G5 is about $6.5 million. So, in that regard, AAC distributions are closer to other G5's.

On the other hand, AAC distributions are a good 14X that of the lowest G5 (at least for media distributions), whereas the lowest P5 distribution is just 5 or 6X that of the AAC. So I suppose that is argument in favor of the AAC being closer to the P5.

I think the "gross dollars" argument is the far better one. For example, if you make $1 million a year, I make $1 thousand a year, and some other person makes 50 cents a year, the proportional argument would say that I was a "tweener" between you and the person making 50 cents, because while your income is 1000x greater than mine, mine is 2000x greater than theirs.

But in reality of course, me and the person making 50 cents would both be dirt poor, while you would be rich, such that I am actually far, far closer to the 50 cent person than to you.

That's an extreme example, but it makes the point: the AAC's $10m or so distribution (with the new 2020 deal) has "buying power" that is much closer to the MW's $5 million, or even CUSA's $1 million, than it is to the PAC's $34 million. You can't eat a percentage, only actual dollars.
06-16-2021 10:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




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


Copyright © 2002-2024 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, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.