RE: Does ESPN want the AAC to take 8 from Sunbelt and CUSA
The AAC is in a tough position.
1) Any addition is at least their fifth choice behind the four MW schools it pursued. In all likelihood, an addition would likely be sixth behind FB-only Army, who I am fairly certain has been pursued as well.
2) The threat that the Big 12 could take Memphis remains. Even worse, there is the threat the Big 12 could also go after USF and/or SMU. This makes the AAC even less attractive to C-USA and especially SB schools.
3) Some C-USA and SB schools that the AAC may be otherwise interested in may turn down an invitation because their athletic budget is so far below the lowest athletic budget in the AAC, much less the median AAC budget. Rumors are that UTSA has already turned down overtures from the AAC, though this has yet to be confirmed my a reputable reporter.
4) The AAC will have a hard time coming to a consensus about what exactly it wants to be. Does it primarily want academic peers with R1 Carnegie profiles? If so, that may come at the expense of athletic success, support, and budget. Does it want to go after football success? That may come at the expense of matching the academic missions of the current AAC schools, as well as athletic budget. Another question is how much basketball profile factors in.
5) It is a valid question whether the AAC boxed itself in with the P6 campaign. If it adds, for example, Charlotte, how can that campaign continue if it is adding the program with the smallest stadium in FBS? If the AAC adds schools and continues the P6 campaign, and includes all the new members, why, then, did the league not add those new schools when UConn departed? How are they suddenly "P6" quality if they were not a mere two years ago?
6) Isn't a concern when the president of a conference member, the president of Temple, publicly states that conferences need to be more regional? That's impossible with the AAC as it is currently constructed. Philadelphia to Wichita to Dallas to Tampa is not regional.
-----
Now, I believe the AAC can reach a consensus on one school: UAB. UAB, I believe, would also be a willing partner and would choose the AAC over it's current league and over the SB. But the AAC needs to go to, at minimum, 10 schools. And it may want to go to 12, or, as speculated, as many as 16.
All that said, I do think the AAC will keep it simple. Rather than going hog wild and adding 8 schools, I think it just adds two members to get to ten total. UAB, as I said, is in, and I expect the league to add the most academically appealing school available, Rice. These are college presidents making these decisions, after all. However, I think Rice will only be invited if Rice pledges to commit to athletics in a way it hasn't in decades. Otherwise, I just don't have any idea.
|