(09-16-2021 02:37 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:31 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  Does MWC do what they did w/ the WAC and invite UNT and Tulsa or UTSA now? See if they jump? UNT will, Tulsa won't UTSA sure could.

Interesting choices. LOL.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

did you read the CBS article it had Tulsa and UNT. I think UNT and UTSA would be more likely.

(09-16-2021 02:08 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  AAC was gonna take B12 schools, now they think MWC schools. Reality they take UAB, UTSA, FAU....whos 4? Marshall? I don't think it's Army because they would have made that list. They must still be a no.

The fourth school would most likely be Charolette in that scenario.
It would meet the profile AAC is seeking. Major markets with proven/up-and-coming programs. All four have new facilities with additional facilities planned. Charlotte has the best facilities and the FB stadium was designed for expansion that can be accomplished in a short period.

Seems like remaining in conference with regional and familiar schools (and maybe even adding Gonzaga in hoops) would be much wiser than joining an ever-changing cross country league mostly made up of schools desperate to belong to a more high-profile conference.

(09-16-2021 02:41 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:30 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

Aresco chasing after MWC teams is like English soccer team X who lets it leak that they are "monitoring" several of the top young players in Europe. They won't sign them, but it puffs up the image of the team to make it look like those players might choose team X.

Is there even one candidate other than UAB east of the Texas state line that wouldn't make Memphis, Navy, SMU, Temple, Tulane and USF grimace?

If that is how their presidents feel, then they can add UAB alone. They only need to add one.

You are naming what I'd prefer if the MWC school plan isn't realistic. Invites are permanent. You guess wrong on which "market" school is gonna work and there's no booting them out.

(09-16-2021 02:43 PM)PeteTheChop Wrote:  Seems like remaining in conference with regional and familiar schools (and maybe even adding Gonzaga in hoops) would be much wiser than joining an ever-changing cross country league mostly made up of schools desperate to belong to a more high-profile conference.

Unless they aspire to belong to a more high-profile conference. Gotta buy the ticket to take the ride.

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

(09-16-2021 02:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

That and the money was less than half what it is now. (And yes we realize that the MWC teams would only join if the money didn't drop).

Plus, odds are, if a handful of teams that aren't Boise leave, then the MWC deal could drop.

(09-16-2021 02:41 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:37 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:31 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  Does MWC do what they did w/ the WAC and invite UNT and Tulsa or UTSA now? See if they jump? UNT will, Tulsa won't UTSA sure could.

Interesting choices. LOL.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

did you read the CBS article it had Tulsa and UNT. I think UNT and UTSA would be more likely.

I sure did. The fact that UNT is mentioned and not SMU tells me there won't be any AAC --> MWC moves. Tulsa is probably the weakest AAC add they could make from a TV perspective.

(09-16-2021 02:58 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:41 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:37 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:31 PM)Fresno St. Alum Wrote:  Does MWC do what they did w/ the WAC and invite UNT and Tulsa or UTSA now? See if they jump? UNT will, Tulsa won't UTSA sure could.

Interesting choices. LOL.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

did you read the CBS article it had Tulsa and UNT. I think UNT and UTSA would be more likely.

I sure did. The fact that UNT is mentioned and not SMU tells me there won't be any AAC --> MWC moves. Tulsa is probably the weakest AAC add they could make from a TV perspective.

That Tulsa thing might have been the most confusing thing in the entire article. Don't really see Tulsa providing much value from the TV revenue perspective, and I really struggle to see any reason Tulsa would want to pay 10+ million to join the MWC, especially if North Texas was the "travel partner".

(09-16-2021 02:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

But two things:

1. That was when there was Houston/Cincy/UCF. Now there's not, and you guys might be following them. Does Boise want in [i]now[/i[?
2. Boise is still in the mix for further Big 12 expansion. Would they commit to the American knowing that the B12 might still be there?

(09-16-2021 03:03 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

But two things:

1. That was when there was Houston/Cincy/UCF. Now there's not, and you guys might be following them. Does Boise want in [i]now[/i[?
2. Boise is still in the mix for further Big 12 expansion. Would they commit to the American knowing that the B12 might still be there?

My guess is as with all things Boise there would need to be a "special deal" to make it work. Maybe the AAC pay their exit fees with the exit fees from the departing 3? Maybe the AAC agree to a special deal with limited to no exit fee for Boise if they got a B12 invite within a certain time period? Certainly plenty of things you could structure if you are creative and desperate.

(09-16-2021 03:03 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

But two things:

1. That was when there was Houston/Cincy/UCF. Now there's not, and you guys might be following them. Does Boise want in [i]now[/i[?
2. Boise is still in the mix for further Big 12 expansion. Would they commit to the American knowing that the B12 might still be there?

Simple. By joining the AAC, they’re better off today and in the future. A move to the AAC doesn’t preclude a future move to the B12.

(09-16-2021 03:07 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 03:03 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

But two things:

1. That was when there was Houston/Cincy/UCF. Now there's not, and you guys might be following them. Does Boise want in [i]now[/i[?
2. Boise is still in the mix for further Big 12 expansion. Would they commit to the American knowing that the B12 might still be there?

My guess is as with all things Boise there would need to be a "special deal" to make it work. Maybe the AAC pay their exit fees with the exit fees from the departing 3? Maybe the AAC agree to a special deal with limited to no exit fee for Boise if they got a B12 invite within a certain time period? Certainly plenty of things you could structure if you are creative and desperate.

And even so, there's no real guarantee. We have no grant of rights. You pay the exit fee and you roll, because you're joining a power conference. Worrying about the exit fee from the conference that you'd need to be in to get the invite in the first place is putting the cart before the horse.

That's like Houston saying, what if we have to pay a large Big 12 exit fee if the SEC invites us?

Going after The MWC is the obvious first choice. The C-USA and Sun Belt schools wont turn them down even if they are only asked after the MWC schools. Gotta at least see if you can make some moves. even just getting AFA, Col St, UNM, and UAB would be a bigger power move than say a collection of CUSA schools. Having said that, I think poaching MWC schools is between slim and none for the AAC

(09-16-2021 03:11 PM)Owls9878 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 03:03 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:36 PM)LaTex14 Wrote:  But if the AAC couldn’t get Boise with UH, UC, and UCF. Why would they get them now?

That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

But two things:

1. That was when there was Houston/Cincy/UCF. Now there's not, and you guys might be following them. Does Boise want in [i]now[/i[?
2. Boise is still in the mix for further Big 12 expansion. Would they commit to the American knowing that the B12 might still be there?

Simple. By joining the AAC, they’re better off today and in the future. A move to the AAC doesn’t preclude a future move to the B12.

No but it adds to the cost

Having said that, a 16 team cross country AAC is clearly going to make more money than a rehash of CUSA 2.0

A non Power 5 conference that stretches coast to coast? This feels like a posturing article to me, because it makes no sense long term.

(09-16-2021 03:15 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  A non Power 5 conference that stretches coast to coast? This feels like a posturing article to me, because it makes no sense long term.

Everyone involved is selling out to get a P5 invite down the road. So no one is thinking long term.

If the MW schools weren’t at least cautiously interested this article wouldn’t have included them as possibles.

(09-16-2021 03:15 PM)JMU2004 Wrote:  A non Power 5 conference that stretches coast to coast? This feels like a posturing article to me, because it makes no sense long term.

2 8 team divisions basically means its 2 conferences sharing auto bids and a media deal.

(09-16-2021 03:12 PM)CoastalJuan Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 03:07 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 03:03 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 02:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:48 PM)Wedge Wrote:  That's the question people keep avoiding.

Noones avoiding it. We keep correcting you guys on this. Boise WANTED into the AAC after Uconn left. They did not have the votes because of what they pulled back in 2012.

But two things:

1. That was when there was Houston/Cincy/UCF. Now there's not, and you guys might be following them. Does Boise want in [i]now[/i[?
2. Boise is still in the mix for further Big 12 expansion. Would they commit to the American knowing that the B12 might still be there?

My guess is as with all things Boise there would need to be a "special deal" to make it work. Maybe the AAC pay their exit fees with the exit fees from the departing 3? Maybe the AAC agree to a special deal with limited to no exit fee for Boise if they got a B12 invite within a certain time period? Certainly plenty of things you could structure if you are creative and desperate.

And even so, there's no real guarantee. We have no grant of rights. You pay the exit fee and you roll, because you're joining a power conference. Worrying about the exit fee from the conference that you'd need to be in to get the invite in the first place is putting the cart before the horse.

That's like Houston saying, what if we have to pay a large Big 12 exit fee if the SEC invites us?

Obviously you wouldn't really be that worried about it, but if you've got pretty reasonable assurances you are getting that invite regardless there's no real point of paying 2 exit fees. I think this isn't going to work, but the fact that it's being leaked out there means it's not a certain no yet.