I don't think that the Western Division concept is dead. The AAC is still earning $7M/school which is more than double the next highest conference. I think, before it's all said and done, that the AAC will offer AFA, SDSU, and UNLV, to go along with SMU, Tulsa, and Navy to form a Western Division. Our TV partner, ESPN will step up to the plate as soon as UT and OU decide to go. For now, just add UAB and leave our options open.

AAC Expansion Candidates

Don't think it's dead either. Neither CSU/AFA AD even came close to closing the door. Hell they were both arguably more complementary to the AAC than they were to their own league. The B12 hinting around at adding more teams is holding up everyone.

Agree.

If Aresco was backfilling simply with CUSA or Sun Belt teams this would be done. The delay is implying something more going on...

(10-08-2021 11:14 AM)Boots Wrote:  Agree.

If Aresco was backfilling simply with CUSA or Sun Belt teams this would be done. The delay is implying something more going on...

I agree and have that this was a possibility all along. This, and it’s also possible that our schools can’t agree on who we need to add in the eastern/central timezones.

I don’t think that we will only add 4 schools if we get programs from the MWC. I think it’s more likely that we would add 6-8 teams if we go that route.

I think that it will wind up being something like this within the next 24 months:

Boise State/Nevada/Utah State/UNM
SDSU/Nevada/Utah State/UNM
UNLV
Fresno State
CSU
AFA

OR

UTSA/Rice
UAB

As much sense as it makes competatively, Marshall, App or Louisiana will not be added at this time.

(10-08-2021 11:06 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Don't think it's dead either. Neither CSU/AFA AD even came close to closing the door. Hell they were both arguably more complementary to the AAC than they were to their own league. The B12 hinting around at adding more teams is holding up everyone.

ITs a brilliant move on their part. Keep the MWC and AAC unstable so they wont form anything together. They may never expand but just do this to keep any conference from challenging them in the future.

(10-08-2021 11:34 AM)mtmedlin Wrote:  

(10-08-2021 11:06 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Don't think it's dead either. Neither CSU/AFA AD even came close to closing the door. Hell they were both arguably more complementary to the AAC than they were to their own league. The B12 hinting around at adding more teams is holding up everyone.

ITs a brilliant move on their part. Keep the MWC and AAC unstable so they wont form anything together. They may never expand but just do this to keep any conference from challenging them in the future.

It will work short term, but once the OU/UT stuff gets settled and their new TV deal comes into place I don't think that hinting is going to continue working. The AAC should do the same short term and add whatever the minimum number is and hint at future moves and keep the Texas schools from going to the MWC.

(10-08-2021 11:14 AM)Boots Wrote:  Agree.

If Aresco was backfilling simply with CUSA or Sun Belt teams this would be done. The delay is implying something more going on...

If he could somehow bring in Army, then an add of CSU, AFA, UAB and Army would be an inside-the-park home run. I think our contract would stay the same in that scenario.

(10-08-2021 11:14 AM)Boots Wrote:  Agree.

If Aresco was backfilling simply with CUSA or Sun Belt teams this would be done. The delay is implying something more going on...

Not really. He was apparently just days away from announcing a western expansion if new reports are to be believed---and then that completely fell apart. Now he is basically starting from scratch with east of the Rockies options. That means the AAC had to go back to the drawing board--not just with respect to who to add---but even the more basic--how many do we add. Its entirely possible the AAC could just add UAB for now and keep their options open since they theoretically have 27 months before they actually lose anyone. Furthermore---there is chatter out there that the insistence of the AAC that any prospective member raise its budget to a certain AAC minimum number is a problem for many schools in the already limited replacement pool. Personally---I think thats just message board fodder---but if it is true---then good riddance. You dont want a school that is not willing to commit financially to the level required to field competitive teams in the league.

(10-08-2021 12:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-08-2021 11:14 AM)Boots Wrote:  Agree.

If Aresco was backfilling simply with CUSA or Sun Belt teams this would be done. The delay is implying something more going on...

Not really. He was apparently just days away from announcing a western expansion if new reports are to be believed---and then that completely fell apart. Now he is basically starting from scratch with east of the Rockies options. That means the AAC had to go back to the drawing board--not just with respect to who to add---but even the more basic--how many do we add. Its entirely possible the AAC could just add UAB for now and keep their options open since they theoretically have 27 months before they actually lose anyone. Furthermore---there is chatter out there that the insistence of the AAC that any prospective member raise its budget to a certain AAC minimum number is a problem for many schools in the already limited replacement pool. Personally---I think thats just message board fodder---but if it is true---then good riddance. You dont want a school that is not willing to commit financially to the level required to field competitive teams in the league.

I do t think he would be starting from scratch. Pretty sure all the eastern teams were also considered. I think the delay is deciding on number and getting ESPN and Presidents behind the moves.

The longer this lasts, the more I wonder if he isn’t trying to make a better pitch to AF and CSU.

If he truly had a short list of CUSA, MAC and Sunbelt then choosing 6 and then bringing them to vote in order to get either 2 or 4 would be pretty easy and could be done in short order.

I don’t get the timeline. We heard about CSU and AF almost a month ago. There’s no way he was only talking to them. He had to be working multiple angles. I just think if we were gonna offer G3 teams, then we would have.

I really wonder if he working the behind the scenes to make a better offer.

(10-08-2021 11:06 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Don't think it's dead either. Neither CSU/AFA AD even came close to closing the door. Hell they were both arguably more complementary to the AAC than they were to their own league. The B12 hinting around at adding more teams is holding up everyone.

it's tantamount to tamu realizing the sec prior to the horns. if boise gets the invite then the mountain will start to crumble

I think whatever side you fall on is how you will look at the extended silence coming from Aresco. The Big 12 is one component that is screwing with the AAC and to a lesser extent the MWC. I think another is the fact is the current tv contract for the MWC expiring after the 2025 season is another factor. The MWC schools can wait to see what will happen to the AAC over the next 24 months in regards to possible teams leaving for the Big 12 and then determine whether or not it is feasible to either stay put or go east.

Meanwhile, the MWC will find out what they can fetch from a new tv deal with or without Boise and see if it matches or passes the AAC current tv deal without UC, UCF, Houston, and possibly Memphis. Reality is time is on the MWC side, it's the AAC that has to act sooner rather than later.

(10-08-2021 12:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-08-2021 11:14 AM)Boots Wrote:  Agree.

If Aresco was backfilling simply with CUSA or Sun Belt teams this would be done. The delay is implying something more going on...

Not really. He was apparently just days away from announcing a western expansion if new reports are to be believed---and then that completely fell apart. Now he is basically starting from scratch with east of the Rockies options. That means the AAC had to go back to the drawing board--not just with respect to who to add---but even the more basic--how many do we add. Its entirely possible the AAC could just add UAB for now and keep their options open since they theoretically have 27 months before they actually lose anyone. Furthermore---there is chatter out there that the insistence of the AAC that any prospective member raise its budget to a certain AAC minimum number is a problem for many schools in the already limited replacement pool. Personally---I think thats just message board fodder---but if it is true---then good riddance. You dont want a school that is not willing to commit financially to the level required to field competitive teams in the league.

This scenario is extremely favorable to Rice. Add UAB and Rice and move on.

(10-08-2021 02:10 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  I think whatever side you fall on is how you will look at the extended silence coming from Aresco. The Big 12 is one component that is screwing with the AAC and to a lesser extent the MWC. I think another is the fact is the current tv contract for the MWC expiring after the 2025 season is another factor. The MWC schools can wait to see what will happen to the AAC over the next 24 months in regards to possible teams leaving for the Big 12 and then determine whether or not it is feasible to either stay put or go east.

Meanwhile, the MWC will find out what they can fetch from a new tv deal with or without Boise and see if it matches or passes the AAC current tv deal without UC, UCF, Houston, and possibly Memphis. Reality is time is on the MWC side, it's the AAC that has to act sooner rather than later.

I think the Western door is closed for now. I was rooting for the AAC getting 2 to 4 MWC schools. I honestly don't know the best play now.

(10-08-2021 02:18 PM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(10-08-2021 02:10 PM)HiddenDragon Wrote:  I think whatever side you fall on is how you will look at the extended silence coming from Aresco. The Big 12 is one component that is screwing with the AAC and to a lesser extent the MWC. I think another is the fact is the current tv contract for the MWC expiring after the 2025 season is another factor. The MWC schools can wait to see what will happen to the AAC over the next 24 months in regards to possible teams leaving for the Big 12 and then determine whether or not it is feasible to either stay put or go east.

Meanwhile, the MWC will find out what they can fetch from a new tv deal with or without Boise and see if it matches or passes the AAC current tv deal without UC, UCF, Houston, and possibly Memphis. Reality is time is on the MWC side, it's the AAC that has to act sooner rather than later.

I think the Western door is closed for now. I was rooting for the AAC getting 2 to 4 MWC schools. I honestly don't know the best play now.

If no MWC schools are coming, the best plays might be to add UAB and say Marshall and stay at 10. Then if the Big 12 takes BSU, the MWC will crumble at that time and you can merge with the best of the mountain west. If you expand past 10, you probably foreclose the possibility of ever getting MW teams in the future.

(10-08-2021 02:16 PM)mustangxc Wrote:  

(10-08-2021 12:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-08-2021 11:14 AM)Boots Wrote:  Agree.

If Aresco was backfilling simply with CUSA or Sun Belt teams this would be done. The delay is implying something more going on...

Not really. He was apparently just days away from announcing a western expansion if new reports are to be believed---and then that completely fell apart. Now he is basically starting from scratch with east of the Rockies options. That means the AAC had to go back to the drawing board--not just with respect to who to add---but even the more basic--how many do we add. Its entirely possible the AAC could just add UAB for now and keep their options open since they theoretically have 27 months before they actually lose anyone. Furthermore---there is chatter out there that the insistence of the AAC that any prospective member raise its budget to a certain AAC minimum number is a problem for many schools in the already limited replacement pool. Personally---I think thats just message board fodder---but if it is true---then good riddance. You dont want a school that is not willing to commit financially to the level required to field competitive teams in the league.

This scenario is extremely favorable to Rice. Add UAB and Rice and move on.

If a Western Division were in the offing, would SDSU feel that Rice was as acceptable as UNLV? Just asking, but I think not.

Wait, what? People still think this is possible?

If the AAC adds Marshall, UTSA, UAB, and FAU, that would be pretty darn good considering the circumstances.

(10-08-2021 02:25 PM)fanhoodtheocho Wrote:  Wait, what? People still think this is possible?

Absolutely. Considering the CSU/AFA AD statements think it's extremely possible after whatever the B12 does gets settled. I'd say you should focus on what Texas schools the MWC needs to add to make those 2 happy and not worry about what we are talking about.