(06-29-2022 11:30 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote: Perception is not reality. Reality lags perception. The reality is - unless improvement occurs - the MWC will likely leapfrog the AAC and the AAC neck and neck with the SBC.
The reality is the AAC took Tulsa and Tulane and somehow got the P6 thing to stick in 10 short years. The AAC has proven they are a well run organization, and I am willing to stake my reputation(worth nothing on internet forums) on the AAC being the pack leader again in 10 years.
FB Massey Composite Index
Average Ranking 2019, 2020, 2021
Tulane..........75
Tulsa............60
None of the CUSA refugees exceeded the performance of the school you maligned - Tulsa. Only two of the six CUSA refugees exceeded Tulane. The reality is the additions (save UAB) are terrible to mediocre on the field.
Ten years is a long, long time and massive improvement will be required by the additions to even meet that distant goal. A change in conference alone will not suffice. Sustained and material investments are required.
So based on your AAC superiority logic, why on earth are two schools who have had AAC exposure and resources for 10 years barely on par with CUSA refugees? Your "point" really makes my point. Tulsa and Tulane were mediocre at best in CUSA and continued to do so in the AAC. They might jump Rice, but once we merge, during, and towards the end Tulane and Tulsa will continue to be mediocre because they've had decades to change and they haven't.
You talk as if though you know something the rest of us don't, but behind the your BS guise of being a "realist" lies the fact that you are the most clueless one here. The commissioner with the guidance of ESPN made the best move available and its going to take time to develop.
I hate people who contribute nothing to my intellect either in the form of sound verifiable knowledge or interesting opposing views. I seldom find people who do neither but you are one of them. We get it the new additions suck blah blah blah get the f over it.
Who are you? I don't pretend to know anything about UTSA, but now that we're in the same conference I'm going to pull for you guys. You clearly don't know anything about Tulane or Tulsa.
I wish you guys success.
The poster, despite evidence to the contrary, asserts UTSA's superiority over Tulane and Tulsa at least in FB and perhaps in basketball.
(06-29-2022 11:36 AM)UTSA_Alum Wrote: The reality is the AAC took Tulsa and Tulane and somehow got the P6 thing to stick in 10 short years. The AAC has proven they are a well run organization, and I am willing to stake my reputation(worth nothing on internet forums) on the AAC being the pack leader again in 10 years.
FB Massey Composite Index
Average Ranking 2019, 2020, 2021
Tulane..........75
Tulsa............60
None of the CUSA refugees exceeded the performance of the school you maligned - Tulsa. Only two of the six CUSA refugees exceeded Tulane. The reality is the additions (save UAB) are terrible to mediocre on the field.
Ten years is a long, long time and massive improvement will be required by the additions to even meet that distant goal. A change in conference alone will not suffice. Sustained and material investments are required.
So based on your AAC superiority logic, why on earth are two schools who have had AAC exposure and resources for 10 years barely on par with CUSA refugees? Your "point" really makes my point. Tulsa and Tulane were mediocre at best in CUSA and continued to do so in the AAC. They might jump Rice, but once we merge, during, and towards the end Tulane and Tulsa will continue to be mediocre because they've had decades to change and they haven't.
You talk as if though you know something the rest of us don't, but behind the your BS guise of being a "realist" lies the fact that you are the most clueless one here. The commissioner with the guidance of ESPN made the best move available and its going to take time to develop.
I hate people who contribute nothing to my intellect either in the form of sound verifiable knowledge or interesting opposing views. I seldom find people who do neither but you are one of them. We get it the new additions suck blah blah blah get the f over it.
We won CUSA in 2012 and were quite good in the years before 2012.
Yeah Tulsa was good and they are still good by those standards.
You have to keep in mind that the teams being compared are currently playing in different conferences against different opponents. ECU was good against most of the current CUSA membership, but took 7 years to become competitive in the AAC.
It took us 7 years to get back on our footing because during the transition we had an AD that hired one of the worst coaches in our history that nosedived the program. Had we at least maintained a somewhat steady state of competence and leadership within the athletic department and football program we would/should have been at least somewhat competitive out of the gate and shown a Memphis like rise with good coaching.
(06-29-2022 11:36 AM)UTSA_Alum Wrote: The reality is the AAC took Tulsa and Tulane and somehow got the P6 thing to stick in 10 short years. The AAC has proven they are a well run organization, and I am willing to stake my reputation(worth nothing on internet forums) on the AAC being the pack leader again in 10 years.
FB Massey Composite Index
Average Ranking 2019, 2020, 2021
Tulane..........75
Tulsa............60
None of the CUSA refugees exceeded the performance of the school you maligned - Tulsa. Only two of the six CUSA refugees exceeded Tulane. The reality is the additions (save UAB) are terrible to mediocre on the field.
Ten years is a long, long time and massive improvement will be required by the additions to even meet that distant goal. A change in conference alone will not suffice. Sustained and material investments are required.
So based on your AAC superiority logic, why on earth are two schools who have had AAC exposure and resources for 10 years barely on par with CUSA refugees? Your "point" really makes my point. Tulsa and Tulane were mediocre at best in CUSA and continued to do so in the AAC. They might jump Rice, but once we merge, during, and towards the end Tulane and Tulsa will continue to be mediocre because they've had decades to change and they haven't.
You talk as if though you know something the rest of us don't, but behind the your BS guise of being a "realist" lies the fact that you are the most clueless one here. The commissioner with the guidance of ESPN made the best move available and its going to take time to develop.
I hate people who contribute nothing to my intellect either in the form of sound verifiable knowledge or interesting opposing views. I seldom find people who do neither but you are one of them. We get it the new additions suck blah blah blah get the f over it.
Who are you? I don't pretend to know anything about UTSA, but now that we're in the same conference I'm going to pull for you guys. You clearly don't know anything about Tulane or Tulsa.
I wish you guys success.
The poster, despite evidence to the contrary, asserts UTSA's superiority over Tulane and Tulsa at least in FB and perhaps in basketball.
(06-29-2022 11:30 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote: Perception is not reality. Reality lags perception. The reality is - unless improvement occurs - the MWC will likely leapfrog the AAC and the AAC neck and neck with the SBC.
Agree MWC will temporarily jump AAC, (not by much) but that will be a temp jump. Sunbelt took best still available after AAC got who they wanted. To act like they are now neck and neck is ridiculous. The leftover 8 of AAC will get 3 to 4 times the $$ and better TV slots than the Belt.
Massey Composite Index
Average 2019, 2020, 2021 Seasons
New AAC....81
New SBC....82
The issue with the Massey Composite Index is that it has nothing to do with conference perception outside of message board discussions with fellow G5 fans. Do you really think that the average CFB fan even looks at Massey?
The perception of the AAC as being above the other G5's has been it's success in getting to NY6 games (6 of 8 years under CFP - including Cincy making the CFP, plus UCF under BCS the year before) and winning them (2 of 3 wins, plus UCF's win the year before). Add to that Cincy being the first team to reach the CFP.
It simply will not matter if SBC beats the AAC in Massey moving forward if the AAC is still able to dominate entry into the NY6/CFP games.
Correct. The perception of the AAC will be based on whether it’s champion can continue to dominate the NY6 bowl spot come 2023. Nothing else really matters.
You each make a good point, although I disagree conference strength is immaterial for the NY6 slot and for perception.
One of the components used for NY6 selection is SOS. Indeed, we have cited the AAC's SOS for justification to select an AAC member over a school from another G-5 conference with the same and nearly the same record. We have substituted the departed three with five relatively weak CUSA refugees. It is bound to matter.
Concerning perception, the reader may recall Tiger BB's utter dominance of C-USA for several years. The perception (wrongly) was Memphis' success was due in large part to playing in "mid-major" C-USA. The Tigers run of FF, E8, S16 and NCAA appearances did nothing to elevate the perception of CUSA.
(This post was last modified: 06-30-2022 07:45 AM by Tiger1983.)
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
clt says that looks correct. Charlotte and rice are T4 for academics
Academics??? You guys are terrible at football. I’m so disgusted that Aresco the wimp let you into this conference. You don’t win nor do you get more than 3k a home game. Awful
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
clt says that looks correct. Charlotte and rice are T4 for academics
Academics??? You guys are terrible at football. I’m so disgusted that Aresco the wimp let you into this conference. You don’t win nor do you get more than 3k a home game. Awful
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
clt says that looks correct. Charlotte and rice are T4 for academics
Academics??? You guys are terrible at football. I’m so disgusted that Aresco the wimp let you into this conference. You don’t win nor do you get more than 3k a home game. Awful
Saying the Sunbelt could leapfrog the AAC is laughable, people always complain about money ruining college sports. Well, the budgets of the incoming CUSA schools will be 15-20+ million dollars higher than Sunbelt teams. This will allow them to grow and let the AAC re-establish it's claim to #P6
(This post was last modified: 06-29-2022 11:56 PM by CLTPirate.)
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
Temple at Tier 3? Below Navy, and SMU, with zero championships combined? Chit list.
Historically, Temple Football has been trash. Outside of the AAC what have you ever done? You have been mediocre the last couple seasons after a strong run in the league. This list is about brand perception.
(06-30-2022 07:38 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote: Boy-z is now the class of the G5?
Wow. That's sad.
Indeed. It is unfortunate the "best of the rest" initiative fizzled. It would have buried the other G-5 conferences. Now the AAC contends with the SBC and the MWC, which is sadder still.
(06-30-2022 07:38 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote: Boy-z is now the class of the G5?
Wow. That's sad.
Indeed. It is unfortunate the "best of the rest" initiative fizzled. It would have buried the other G-5 conferences. Now the AAC contends with the SBC and the MWC, which is sadder still.
It depends on where things go from here. If a couple of the better teams in AAC have big years and make the NY6 bowls, the perception of them will change. If not then the perception of the AAC will shift down.
In one sense, adding some lower teams will help everyone left because it will potentially boast their records. Add 2 or 3 wins every year to the records of the top teams that are not leaving and suddenly they look different to the rest of the football world. Who you beat is less important than people think. Northern Illinois went to the Orange Bowl in '12 with one loss and their best win was against Kent State.
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
Temple at Tier 3? Below Navy, and SMU, with zero championships combined? Chit list.
Historically, Temple Football has been trash. Outside of the AAC what have you ever done? You have been mediocre the last couple seasons after a strong run in the league. This list is about brand perception.
Temple's football teams have only had 4 sub-.500 seasons since 2008. The sub-par seasons were due to two questionable coaching hires that have both been replaced.
2008-2011:
2009 9-4
2010 8-4
2011 9-4
Avg: 8.67 wins/year
2014-2020:
2014 6-6
2015 10-4
2016 10-4 Conference Championship Team
2017 7-6 AAC East Division Champions
2018 8-5
2019 8-5
Average: 8.16 wins/year.
Temple's new HC (Stan Drayton, from U. Texas) has impressed a lot of people with the way he has assembled his coaching staff, with considerable P5 experience, and TUFB's recruiting has already picked up noticeably. The rebuilt Owls program may need a year or two, but a lot of Temple fans are excited about what's happening with the program.
The best thing for the AAC would be if East Carolina became the flagship.
They have a low likelihood of leaving since their tv market is fairly small and Carolinas are oversaturated with P5 teams.
East Carolina has the potential to be Boise State, great on the field performer but doesn't get poached.
If they kept all the large tv markets teams in check and blew them out on the field it would dissipate some of the realignment interest in Memphis, USF, SMU, etc etc.
A Pirate flagship keeps the AAC healthy and free of poachers.
(This post was last modified: 06-30-2022 10:14 AM by ArmoredUpKnight.)
(06-30-2022 10:12 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote: The best thing for the AAC would be if East Carolina became the flagship.
They have a low likelihood of leaving since their tv market is fairly small and Carolinas are oversaturated with P5 teams.
East Carolina has the potential to be Boise State, great on the field performer but doesn't get poached.
If they kept all the large tv markets teams in check and blew them out on the field it would dissipate some of the realignment interest in Memphis, USF, SMU, etc etc.
A Pirate flagship keeps the AAC healthy and free of poachers.
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
Temple at Tier 3? Below Navy, and SMU, with zero championships combined? Chit list.
Historically, Temple Football has been trash. Outside of the AAC what have you ever done? You have been mediocre the last couple seasons after a strong run in the league. This list is about brand perception.
Historically, SMU football has the reputation of a school that cheated so obnoxiously they received the death penalty. What exactly have the Mustangs accomplished ‘perception-wise’ beyond that? That is your brand perception. On top of no legitimate football championships.
(06-29-2022 12:24 PM)goodknightfl Wrote: Agree MWC will temporarily jump AAC, (not by much) but that will be a temp jump. Sunbelt took best still available after AAC got who they wanted. To act like they are now neck and neck is ridiculous. The leftover 8 of AAC will get 3 to 4 times the $$ and better TV slots than the Belt.
Massey Composite Index
Average 2019, 2020, 2021 Seasons
New AAC....81
New SBC....82
The issue with the Massey Composite Index is that it has nothing to do with conference perception outside of message board discussions with fellow G5 fans. Do you really think that the average CFB fan even looks at Massey?
The perception of the AAC as being above the other G5's has been it's success in getting to NY6 games (6 of 8 years under CFP - including Cincy making the CFP, plus UCF under BCS the year before) and winning them (2 of 3 wins, plus UCF's win the year before). Add to that Cincy being the first team to reach the CFP.
It simply will not matter if SBC beats the AAC in Massey moving forward if the AAC is still able to dominate entry into the NY6/CFP games.
Correct. The perception of the AAC will be based on whether it’s champion can continue to dominate the NY6 bowl spot come 2023. Nothing else really matters.
You each make a good point, although I disagree conference strength is immaterial for the NY6 slot and for perception.
One of the components used for NY6 selection is SOS. Indeed, we have cited the AAC's SOS for justification to select an AAC member over a school from another G-5 conference with the same and nearly the same record. We have substituted the departed three with five relatively weak CUSA refugees. It is bound to matter.
Concerning perception, the reader may recall Tiger BB's utter dominance of C-USA for several years. The perception (wrongly) was Memphis' success was due in large part to playing in "mid-major" C-USA. The Tigers run of FF, E8, S16 and NCAA appearances did nothing to elevate the perception of CUSA.
I'm not saying that conference strength is immaterial, just that the perception of strength is based on the top teams and not on Massey. Massey takes into account the bottom and mid-level teams and so the SunBelt could rate better than the AAC if they get a few more teams to 6-6 while a few more AAC teams are at 4-8. But again, if the AAC has a dominant team that year and the SunBelt doesn't, perception will be that the AAC was the better conference.
Also, I should preface my initial post - what's most important for the AAC moving forward is not just to dominate the NY6 games, it is to do so with multiple teams making appearances - that's what truly gives the perception of strength as a conference. If, for example, Memphis goes on to the next few NY6 games (after having played in one already a few years ago) then the perception of the AAC will trend towards that of the MWC with Boise dominating.
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
Temple at Tier 3? Below Navy, and SMU, with zero championships combined? Chit list.
Historically, Temple Football has been trash. Outside of the AAC what have you ever done? You have been mediocre the last couple seasons after a strong run in the league. This list is about brand perception.
Historically, SMU football has the reputation of a school that cheated so obnoxiously they received the death penalty. What exactly have the Mustangs accomplished ‘perception-wise’ beyond that? That is your brand perception. On top of no legitimate football championships.
We won a national championship in the pre-AP era, Doak Walker won the Heisman, were a premiere program in the SWC early days and have 5 NFL HOF members. I'd say that is pretty significant even if you exclude the Pony Express era.
(06-29-2022 02:08 PM)mustangxc Wrote: For those asking the AAC tiers are:
Tier 2:
SMU
Memphis
Navy
UAB
Tier 3:
Tulsa
Tulane
Temple
USF
ECU
UNT
UTSA
FAU
Tier 4:
Rice
Charlotte
*No tier 1 schools remain (UH, UC, UCF are Tier 1 along with Boise State)
Temple at Tier 3? Below Navy, and SMU, with zero championships combined? Chit list.
Historically, Temple Football has been trash. Outside of the AAC what have you ever done? You have been mediocre the last couple seasons after a strong run in the league. This list is about brand perception.
Historically, SMU football has the reputation of a school that cheated so obnoxiously they received the death penalty. What exactly have the Mustangs accomplished ‘perception-wise’ beyond that? That is your brand perception. On top of no legitimate football championships.
We won a national championship in the pre-AP era, Doak Walker won the Heisman, were a premiere program in the SWC early days and have 5 NFL HOF members. I'd say that is pretty significant even if you exclude the Pony Express era.
Thats a mighty big IF hombre.
Temple and Tulane played in the inaugural Sugar Bowl in 1937, if you want to discuss ancient history.
(This post was last modified: 06-30-2022 02:38 PM by vick mike.)