(10-09-2021 02:30 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 02:05 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  AAC will have to comply when the new playoff format is released and it shows that the G6 is left out completely at which point the three AAC schools won’t need to go to the b-12 at all
the new playoff format when released will trigger everything, untill then it’s all posturing

Let Houston stay in the AAC, if they want.

Cincinnati is gone, no matter what.

I know bawhahaha.
ECU will take Houston’s spot in a heartbeat

After the SBC stops laughing they will say sure, you can have ULM and UTA and UALR. We'll take USM and Marshall.

(10-09-2021 02:38 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  It makes little sense for the AAC to agree to this. I can understand it making sense for C-USA and the Sun Belt to reorganize based on regional ties. The AAC schools simply don’t see the others as equals (and that’s reflected in the TV payouts).

Payouts all equally small.

This makes complete sense for all the G5. Finally admitting that FBS conferences have become tiered…and the A5 will always be able to easily poach from any G5 conference. The MAC (in the Midwest) and Mountain West are already geographically aligned. The real need is to merge the AAC, C-USA and Sun Belt and gradually transition into three geographic-based “conferences”…with Eastern, Southern and Southwestern conferences. They could eventually negotiate media deals as one entity and even have marquee scheduling across geographies (similar to the Alliance of the ACC, B1G & PAC).

Long-term, a few schools could be asked to be flexible in changing geographic allegiance. For example, schools in Arkansas could be part of the Southwest or Southeast.

Conference commissioners will initially sound skeptical of this proposal. It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  This makes complete sense for all the G5. Finally admitting that FBS conferences have become tiered…and the A5 will always be able to easily poach from any G5 conference. The MAC (in the Midwest) and Mountain West are already geographically aligned. The real need is to merge the AAC, C-USA and Sun Belt and gradually transition into three geographic-based “conferences”…with Eastern, Southern and Southwestern conferences. They could eventually negotiate media deals as one entity and even have marquee scheduling across geographies (similar to the Alliance of the ACC, B1G & PAC).

Long-term, a few schools could be asked to be flexible in changing geographic allegiance. For example, schools in Arkansas could be part of the Southwest or Southeast.

Conference commissioners will initially sound skeptical of this proposal. It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

Lol

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  This makes complete sense for all the G5. Finally admitting that FBS conferences have become tiered…and the A5 will always be able to easily poach from any G5 conference. The MAC (in the Midwest) and Mountain West are already geographically aligned. The real need is to merge the AAC, C-USA and Sun Belt and gradually transition into three geographic-based “conferences”…with Eastern, Southern and Southwestern conferences. They could eventually negotiate media deals as one entity and even have marquee scheduling across geographies (similar to the Alliance of the ACC, B1G & PAC).

Long-term, a few schools could be asked to be flexible in changing geographic allegiance. For example, schools in Arkansas could be part of the Southwest or Southeast.

Conference commissioners will initially sound skeptical of this proposal. It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

I don’t-it’s bad PR if nothing else given the whole “P6” they’ve been trying to shove down people’s throats

And the Sunbelt is practically the MAC of the south now (the cohesiveness and regionality)

This is very much a CUSA play to stave off being raided by the American and sun belt and both are going to happen

The sun belt rejects this idea just as quickly as the AAC. They might answer the call just to laugh in the faces of the schools that left. AAC doesn’t even answer the call.

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

The ADs and presidents will be the most skeptical. Forget about which teams are “better” or “more worthy” than others; there are a few thousand comments elsewhere on this board to argue about that. Think about it as a pragmatic business decision, and use Temple/ECU/USF as an example since you mentioned them. It’s a proposed transaction, or trade. From their perspective this kind of realignment, among other things, would amount to trading away SMU and Memphis and getting ODU and Marshall in return. Can you convince Temple/ECU/USF that would be a good deal for them?

(10-09-2021 03:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  This makes complete sense for all the G5. Finally admitting that FBS conferences have become tiered…and the A5 will always be able to easily poach from any G5 conference. The MAC (in the Midwest) and Mountain West are already geographically aligned. The real need is to merge the AAC, C-USA and Sun Belt and gradually transition into three geographic-based “conferences”…with Eastern, Southern and Southwestern conferences. They could eventually negotiate media deals as one entity and even have marquee scheduling across geographies (similar to the Alliance of the ACC, B1G & PAC).

Long-term, a few schools could be asked to be flexible in changing geographic allegiance. For example, schools in Arkansas could be part of the Southwest or Southeast.

Conference commissioners will initially sound skeptical of this proposal. It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

Lol

Today, the AAC may be able to take schools from C-USA or Sun Belt. Nevertheless, the AAC has bigger worries from the B12 (e.g., Memphis, SMU and/or USF could get promotions) or the Mountain West (e.g., encroachment into Texas). The future of the AAC looks very similar to C-USA’s past…the success of individual schools make them candidates for promotion, leaving the conference increasingly unstable. In an odd analogy, conference alignment seems more like British soccer leagues. The B12 stabilized by co-opting the AAC’s strategic plan.

(10-09-2021 01:23 PM)RamblinRedWolf Wrote:  https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...ed-monday/

Why would AAC get involved?

(10-09-2021 02:05 PM)JHS55 Wrote:  AAC will have to comply when the new playoff format is released and it shows that the G6 is left out completely at which point the three AAC schools won’t need to go to the b-12 at all
the new playoff format when released will trigger everything, untill then it’s all posturing

Absurd. There’s an article today indicating that the new 12 team format that was originally presented will likely pass this Dec and begin as early as 2023.

(10-09-2021 03:42 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The sun belt rejects this idea just as quickly as the AAC. They might answer the call just to laugh in the faces of the schools that left. AAC doesn’t even answer the call.

Some horse trading between the SBC/CUSA might be in order.

After the AAC makes its moves.

(10-09-2021 04:27 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:42 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The sun belt rejects this idea just as quickly as the AAC. They might answer the call just to laugh in the faces of the schools that left. AAC doesn’t even answer the call.

Some horse trading between the SBC/AAC might be in order.

After the AAC makes its moves.

Maybe. More likely the Sunbelt takes who they want from what’s left and CUSA adds what they need to be a 9 or 10 team conference. I think the window to do something like this with the Sunbelt has passed—another Judy failure.

(10-09-2021 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

The ADs and presidents will be the most skeptical. Forget about which teams are “better” or “more worthy” than others; there are a few thousand comments elsewhere on this board to argue about that. Think about it as a pragmatic business decision, and use Temple/ECU/USF as an example since you mentioned them. It’s a proposed transaction, or trade. From their perspective this kind of realignment, among other things, would amount to trading away SMU and Memphis and getting ODU and Marshall in return. Can you convince Temple/ECU/USF that would be a good deal for them?

Disagree. IMO, G5 presidents and ADs will be more concerned about the finances of staying competitive at the FBS-level. Using Temple as an example, the prestige of aligning with academic elites (e.g., SMU and Tulane versus Marshall and ODU) is over-rated. An occasional football game against Penn State, Rutgers or Notre Dame does more for Temple’s reputation and finances, than annual games in an increasingly far flung conference. Losing Memphis, that has strong football and basketball programs, is problematic…but these stronger schools are now always at risk for promotion into the B12. Temple should try to negotiate continued football/basketball games against Memphis ( a la the Alliance).

Most G5 programs lose (need subsidies) of millions on FBS-level competition. Addressing finances is the top priority.

(10-09-2021 04:30 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 04:27 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:42 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  The sun belt rejects this idea just as quickly as the AAC. They might answer the call just to laugh in the faces of the schools that left. AAC doesn’t even answer the call.

Some horse trading between the SBC/AAC might be in order.

After the AAC makes its moves.

Maybe. More likely the Sunbelt takes who they want from what’s left and CUSA adds what they need fo be a 9 or 10 team conference. I think the window to do something like this with the Sunbelt has passed—another Judy failure.

Nah. Sun Belt may have been a better football conference the last 3 years, but they are still the bottom conference. Don't have the budgets or the non-football success.

(10-09-2021 03:59 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:29 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  This makes complete sense for all the G5. Finally admitting that FBS conferences have become tiered…and the A5 will always be able to easily poach from any G5 conference. The MAC (in the Midwest) and Mountain West are already geographically aligned. The real need is to merge the AAC, C-USA and Sun Belt and gradually transition into three geographic-based “conferences”…with Eastern, Southern and Southwestern conferences. They could eventually negotiate media deals as one entity and even have marquee scheduling across geographies (similar to the Alliance of the ACC, B1G & PAC).

Long-term, a few schools could be asked to be flexible in changing geographic allegiance. For example, schools in Arkansas could be part of the Southwest or Southeast.

Conference commissioners will initially sound skeptical of this proposal. It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

Lol

Today, the AAC may be able to take schools from C-USA or Sun Belt. Nevertheless, the AAC has bigger worries from the B12 (e.g., Memphis, SMU and/or USF could get promotions) or the Mountain West (e.g., encroachment into Texas). The future of the AAC looks very similar to C-USA’s past…the success of individual schools make them candidates for promotion, leaving the conference increasingly unstable. In an odd analogy, conference alignment seems more like British soccer leagues. The B12 stabilized by co-opting the AAC’s strategic plan.

So what? Even with this regional plan, the P5 will still be taking from the G5 at will so any stability at that level is an illusion. Furthermore, this doesn’t create stability by lifting everyone upward—-it creates stability by taking the top conference and splitting it up in such a dilutive way that all 3 conferences are now going to get $500K a school CUSA level deals.

The basic concept has some merit—-but the only way this type of thing works is if all the schools are currently getting very similar media payouts. Under that scenario—-swapping schools around has no financial repercussions beyond cutting travel expenses. But if one group is getting 7 million a team and another is getting 400K a team—-those swaps don’t make much sense to the higher earners.

(10-09-2021 04:32 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

The ADs and presidents will be the most skeptical. Forget about which teams are “better” or “more worthy” than others; there are a few thousand comments elsewhere on this board to argue about that. Think about it as a pragmatic business decision, and use Temple/ECU/USF as an example since you mentioned them. It’s a proposed transaction, or trade. From their perspective this kind of realignment, among other things, would amount to trading away SMU and Memphis and getting ODU and Marshall in return. Can you convince Temple/ECU/USF that would be a good deal for them?

Disagree. IMO, G5 presidents and ADs will be more concerned about the finances of staying competitive at the FBS-level. Using Temple as an example, the prestige of aligning with academic elites (e.g., SMU and Tulane versus Marshall and ODU) is over-rated. An occasional football game against Penn State, Rutgers or Notre Dame does more for Temple’s reputation and finances, than annual games in an increasingly far flung conference. Losing Memphis, that has strong football and basketball programs, is problematic…but these stronger schools are now always at risk for promotion into the B12. Temple should try to negotiate continued football/basketball games against Memphis ( a la the Alliance).

Most G5 programs lose (need subsidies) of millions on FBS-level competition. Addressing finances is the top priority.

AAC still looks academically like a P5. They lead in money. They have the lead in getting a CFP slot. There is absolutely no reason those schools downgrade themselves to a 1 bid bb league and a drop from the #6 conference to a tie for 7 to 10 with the MAC, CUSA and SB.

(10-09-2021 04:32 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 03:19 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  It will be the individual school presidents and athletic directors that will immediately understand the benefits. I could see Temple, ECU and USF putting a lot pressure on Aresco to fully vet this proposal before proposing any AAC specific expansion.

The ADs and presidents will be the most skeptical. Forget about which teams are “better” or “more worthy” than others; there are a few thousand comments elsewhere on this board to argue about that. Think about it as a pragmatic business decision, and use Temple/ECU/USF as an example since you mentioned them. It’s a proposed transaction, or trade. From their perspective this kind of realignment, among other things, would amount to trading away SMU and Memphis and getting ODU and Marshall in return. Can you convince Temple/ECU/USF that would be a good deal for them?

Disagree. IMO, G5 presidents and ADs will be more concerned about the finances of staying competitive at the FBS-level. Using Temple as an example, the prestige of aligning with academic elites (e.g., SMU and Tulane versus Marshall and ODU) is over-rated. An occasional football game against Penn State, Rutgers or Notre Dame does more for Temple’s reputation and finances, than annual games in an increasingly far flung conference. Losing Memphis, that has strong football and basketball programs, is problematic…but these stronger schools are now always at risk for promotion into the B12. Temple should try to negotiate continued football/basketball games against Memphis ( a la the Alliance).

Most G5 programs lose (need subsidies) of millions on FBS-level competition. Addressing finances is the top priority.

No, ego is the top priority. If they have to spend a little more to feel better about their neighborhood, they’ll just take a few million more out of the general fund or increase student fees by another few hundred bucks a year.

USF already has to stay behind and watch UCF ride off into the Big 12. They’re not going to add to that by walking away from SMU and Memphis to join up with the F_Us.

In college sports, pridefulness wins out over pragmatism. And here, I’m not even sure the case for pragmatism is compelling.

Clearly, this seems like a desperate ploy by C-USA to avoid being further weakened by realignment. They are the only ones who would benefit from this, which explains why the AAC and SBC are already dismissing the idea.

(10-09-2021 02:22 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-09-2021 02:06 PM)OhioBoilermaker Wrote:  The wild card here is Delaney. If anyone can pull this off, it's him.

Ummm no. The guy is painted as a “genius” because he just happened to be in charge of a league everyone wants to join. Unless he’s got a plan to be presented that makes the AAC schools more money than they’d made by just taking whoever they want this never even gets considered. Even if that mythical plan existed the egos still stop it. I don’t see anyone clamoring for “fairness and reorganization” at the P5 level. I’ll listen when that gets seriously talked about.

He’s painted as a genius because he put the B1G in a position to make more money than the SEC, even with Texas and Oklahoma. I’d refer you to Frank on that point.

And I never said it would happen. I said that if someone could make it happen, then it’s Delaney.