(10-25-2023 09:19 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:15 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  Congrats to the AAC! I was hoping they'd add another sub-par football program, and they did. Best of luck!

They also extended the geographic extent of the conference, which was already an issue for many potential adds currently in the Sun Belt.

There’s really no need for snark in either direction. The SBC and the AAC have both become the conference that they wanted to be. Both of them can (and I believe, will) thrive with the current set-up.

I'm happy for the AAC. They got what they wanted: A name brand! One that's 0-2 vs. the Sun Belt this season.

(10-25-2023 09:16 AM)solohawks Wrote:  It will be interesting to see what the new A10 TV deal looks like.

ESPN could save money by funneling who they want from the A10 to the AAC and letting the rest go or giving them the ESPN+ midmajor treatment

That is exactly the sort of sleazy/shady move that ESPN is known for, but at least for now I don’t think it’s going to happen. We shall see.

(10-25-2023 09:21 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:16 AM)solohawks Wrote:  It will be interesting to see what the new A10 TV deal looks like.

ESPN could save money by funneling who they want from the A10 to the AAC and letting the rest go or giving them the ESPN+ midmajor treatment

That is exactly the sort of sleazy/shady move that ESPN is known for, but at least for now I don’t think it’s going to happen. We shall see.

A10 contract is up after this year....so don't be surprised if the A10 gets Big Easted

Now I’m rooting for Air Force to AAC to make Commander-In-Chief a conference award.

Awesome! Love this move!

Great move for the American and the leadership at West Point.

Way to go Mikey A.

Now find a way — any way — to get Air Force aboard for football ...

(10-25-2023 09:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:11 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 08:16 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:46 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  What a terrible and desperate move by the AAC. You don’t get Navy or Army’s biggest game or allowing them to play as conference foes unless they both go to the championship game, which, spoiler, is never gonna happen. Sure, there’s the optics of having Army, but they aren’t boosting the conference or aiding the goal of schools becoming P5. They actually drag strength of schedule down and continue to stretch the footprint.

This is a horrendous take. When you can get one of the better G5 tv draws on the board whose draw isn't dependent on wins/losses, you take it.
https://sicem365.com/s/13048/how-many-vi...am-attract

Based on that data, if you remove the Army-Navy game for each year, which the conference doesn’t own or get benefit from, you’re looking at an average of 1mil viewers per televised game from 2013-2021. That puts them roughly in line with SMU and ECU’s charted games on the graph and slightly below Navy. Those are good numbers, for sure, but I just don’t think they make up for the drawbacks, especially with the downward trend by losing the triple option.

This is not the slamdunk you think it is.
CBSSN is not Nielsen rated, so HALF of Army's games are not counted (Just like 4 of Navy's games are not counted each year).

But the value of Navy and Army to ESPN is demonstrated by ESPN's actual actions.

Charlotte and Temple this year are the second and third Navy AAC game on ESPN+ under the AAC contract.
ESPN televises Navy games in their grasp far more than other AAC members.
Army visits to AAC schools get ESPN coverage.

Now look at YOUR conference. Army visits to Sun Belt schools also get ESPN love. Army has MORE linear ESPN on the Sun Belt contract than I think the majority of Sun Belt schools have linear ESPN on the Sun Belt contract

It wasn’t meant to be a slam dunk? Literally said those are good numbers. Also, CBSSN probably isn’t changing the average of their top televised games for the better, since not as many people have it.

As for the linear games comparison, why would anyone be surprised by that? Army has national reach where most schools don’t. Of course they get more games put on TV.

My only point was that I don’t personally believe their TV ratings at 1mil outweigh their lackluster football and extension of the conference footprint.

(10-25-2023 07:24 AM)solohawks Wrote:  24-25 seems aggressive. I'm interested in the details of their transition to conference life

"Working toward" likely means 25-26 is sorted, have a few more contracts to unwind to clear 24-25.

(10-25-2023 07:43 AM)RamblinRedWolf Wrote:  I would think that unless Pac ___ goes shopping for new schools in the near future this should probably bring realignment to a temporary pause right?

This clearly demonstrates that Army wasn't waiting on the 2Pac to make their decision. It leads me to believe that some sort of super-g5 conference in the old Pac shell is not in the cards, too.

(10-25-2023 09:17 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:09 AM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 08:53 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:34 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:30 AM)esayem Wrote:  As much as I like the academies tradition of Independence, I understand why this move makes sense.

Now we can speculate whether or not the AAC is looking at a #14 for hoops.

They should go to 16 for hoops and take VCU, Dayton and St. Louis

VCU and St. Louis fit the eastern and western factions as well as solid basketball programs while Dayton is arguably the best overall supported basketball program not in a P5/Big East conference.

Taking all 3 would cement the AAC's status over the A10

I dont think the interest is there from either side. I doubt the AAC wants to expand by 3, perhaps only 1. I also dont see why those A10 schools jump to the current AAC. The money is probably better but that might be about it.

VCU has the regional rivals.
Dayton is close enough to the East Coast
SLU now has Loyola as a rival.

I think everyone is sitting fat and happy in the A10.

VCU would have regional rivals in the AAC plus one or two million dollars more, a better seed in the tourney and probably a bid or two more.

Dayton is in Ohio, central/southern OHIO. More money, higher seed, and a bid or two more.

SLU is a ways from Chicago and has little history with Loyola Chicago. More money, more bids.

All three of these will take an invite, not sure the AAC makes a move, but they should. Probably getting all three is the easiest, but they can choose their one if thats what they want. With the size of the conference (we currently have divisions or could in multiple sports) travel cost is going to be a minimal increase. The only negative is leaving behind credits.

Why do so many people think this? Most everyone actually involved with these schools seems to believe that it's not at all something they would entertain.

They're in a basketball first conference and like it that way.

(10-25-2023 09:17 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:09 AM)Garden_KC Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 08:53 AM)PicksUp Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:34 AM)solohawks Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:30 AM)esayem Wrote:  As much as I like the academies tradition of Independence, I understand why this move makes sense.

Now we can speculate whether or not the AAC is looking at a #14 for hoops.

They should go to 16 for hoops and take VCU, Dayton and St. Louis

VCU and St. Louis fit the eastern and western factions as well as solid basketball programs while Dayton is arguably the best overall supported basketball program not in a P5/Big East conference.

Taking all 3 would cement the AAC's status over the A10

I dont think the interest is there from either side. I doubt the AAC wants to expand by 3, perhaps only 1. I also dont see why those A10 schools jump to the current AAC. The money is probably better but that might be about it.

VCU has the regional rivals.
Dayton is close enough to the East Coast
SLU now has Loyola as a rival.

I think everyone is sitting fat and happy in the A10.

VCU would have regional rivals in the AAC plus one or two million dollars more, a better seed in the tourney and probably a bid or two more.

Dayton is in Ohio, central/southern OHIO. More money, higher seed, and a bid or two more.

SLU is a ways from Chicago and has little history with Loyola Chicago. More money, more bids.

All three of these will take an invite, not sure the AAC makes a move, but they should. Probably getting all three is the easiest, but they can choose their one if thats what they want. With the size of the conference (we currently have divisions or could in multiple sports) travel cost is going to be a minimal increase. The only negative is leaving behind credits.

Man you are over confident for something that is not even in discussion.

You are also not considering Loyola's admittance may have been a token to keep SLU/UD in the A10 over going to the ACC. To stamp out all overatures.

I don't see ECU/Charlotte the same thing for VCU as Davision, Richmond, GWU and George Mason. Those are the schools VCU fans want to play.

Also the instability of the AAC with half of the conference vetted for the ACC. ACC is likely to need them in the next 5-10 years at the very least.

(10-25-2023 07:51 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:46 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  What a terrible and desperate move by the AAC. You don’t get Navy or Army’s biggest game or allowing them to play as conference foes unless they both go to the championship game, which, spoiler, is never gonna happen. Sure, there’s the optics of having Army, but they aren’t boosting the conference or aiding the goal of schools becoming P5. They actually drag strength of schedule down and continue to stretch the footprint.

Your comments have merit, but Army is a special case due to its unique status for me.

Yeah, no Conference is going to regret adding Army. Short of raiding a few from the MWC, this was the best possible move for Aresco. Kudos to him and the AAC for getting it done, I'll admit that I had my doubts.

This seems like a win-win for everyone involved, minus the AD having to scramble to walk back/reschedule OOC games before next season.

Army has 10 games guaranteed each year, 8 in conference, 2 games against AFA & Navy. They also get to play 1-3 Texas games, 1-2 Florida games, & games throughout the Southeast without having to schedule that OOC.

AAC now can spread the love w the military institutes since their matchup is an OOC game, so everyone should get at least one game against either Army or Navy, which will naturally bring more eyeballs & more butts in seats from local military residents for 1-2 games every season.

(10-25-2023 09:42 AM)bryanw1995 Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:43 AM)RamblinRedWolf Wrote:  I would think that unless Pac ___ goes shopping for new schools in the near future this should probably bring realignment to a temporary pause right?

This clearly demonstrates that Army wasn't waiting on the 2Pac to make their decision. It leads me to believe that some sort of super-g5 conference in the old Pac shell is not in the cards, too.

As neat as a Super G Conference would be, it doesn’t make sense. 14 seems to be ideal: AAC/Army, MWC/PAC2, SBC, MAC/???.

(10-25-2023 09:45 AM)e-parade Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:17 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  VCU would have regional rivals in the AAC plus one or two million dollars more, a better seed in the tourney and probably a bid or two more.

Dayton is in Ohio, central/southern OHIO. More money, higher seed, and a bid or two more.

SLU is a ways from Chicago and has little history with Loyola Chicago. More money, more bids.

All three of these will take an invite, not sure the AAC makes a move, but they should. Probably getting all three is the easiest, but they can choose their one if thats what they want. With the size of the conference (we currently have divisions or could in multiple sports) travel cost is going to be a minimal increase. The only negative is leaving behind credits.

Why do so many people think this? Most everyone actually involved with these schools seems to believe that it's not at all something they would entertain.

They're in a basketball first conference and like it that way.

It's the same poster who spoke very confidently here in 2021 that the AAC was poaching the Big XII.

(07-29-2021 10:21 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 10:18 AM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 10:08 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  It's different this time around because ESPN clearly supports the AAC better than it supported CUSA 2.0.

L8 and ESPN clearly at odds with each other. L8 will likely go with Fox exclusively in their next tv deal if they stay alive for that long. UCF has a good relationship with ESPN. Orlando and Disney are synonymous. When UCF wins NY6 bowls we have had the Disney parade and celebration. I doubt UCF will ever go to a conference that is not ESPN affiliated. UCF has and will continue to follow ESPN's advise on realignment.

I doubt the L8 sends any invites but if they do send one to UCF the groundwork has been set for a very public rejection to further hurt the Big12 brand.

OK, I wonder if Cincinnati & Memphis have any such qualms.

Lol they will be rejecting the lil 8 too.

ESPN will up our pay just to spite and crush the big Xii for that letter.

It's the MW or Army as options for invites. No ESPN property (AAC/BYU) is moving to the little 8

(07-29-2021 10:19 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(07-29-2021 10:11 AM)solohawks Wrote:  It will be fascinating if they can pick of any schools in ESPN's AAC since they have planted themselves pretty firmly in the non ESPN camp of college sports.

That's not happening, especially with the cease and desist.

They won't be getting BYU either another ESPN exclusive partner. The spite will ensure it.

So if they are looking, its Army or the MW.

Boise and AFA are the best odds right now.

(07-27-2021 02:33 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:  

(07-27-2021 01:45 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  Big 12 still has more strength plus A5 status. If the 8 are still together, they are still head and shoulders above the AAC in every category.

AAC is in process of becoming Autonomus.

There are zero metrics where the little 8 are head and shoulders above the AAC. Not in draft picks in basketball or football, not in performance, recent national championships, or tradition. They are in fact behind the AAC in almost everyone of these. They also are behind the AAC in viewership once Texas and OU's knock ins are taken out. Hell it might even be worse because some of those numbers have been the result of Iowa St, K-State, or OSU knocking off one of them and becoming the it team in a power conference, something that won't happen anymore.

Numbers with OU and Texas:

https://mobile.twitter.com/slmandel/stat...3639821321

(10-25-2023 07:43 AM)AssKickingChicken Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:35 AM)stever20 Wrote:  was chopped off-
Official announcement this afternoon, source said. Although Army & Navy will both be in AAC, annual Army-Navy game will still be played 2nd Saturday in December as non-conference contest. If Army & Navy finish in top 2 in AAC standings, they would play for AAC title 1st weekend in December & also following week in non-conference game. W/Army’s move to AAC, only 3 FBS independents remain: Notre Dame, UConn & UMass

With Notre Dame’s agreement with the ACC and annual games with Navy, Stanford, and USC, they have a quasi-conference schedule every year with eight pre-arranged games. Only UMASS and UCONN are true independents and they just lost a school in their area who would have a bunch of open dates every year.

That's actually nothing new. Notre Dame has played something of a "virtual conference" schedule for as long as I remember, although the exact membership has changed from time to time. Immediately prior to the ACC deal, it was

Boston College
Michigan
Michigan State
Navy
Pittsburgh
Purdue
Stanford
USC

Other schools that have rotated in and out of it since my childhood have included

Air Force
Georgia Tech
Miami (FL)
Northwestern
Penn State

(10-25-2023 09:29 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:11 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 08:16 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:46 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  What a terrible and desperate move by the AAC. You don’t get Navy or Army’s biggest game or allowing them to play as conference foes unless they both go to the championship game, which, spoiler, is never gonna happen. Sure, there’s the optics of having Army, but they aren’t boosting the conference or aiding the goal of schools becoming P5. They actually drag strength of schedule down and continue to stretch the footprint.

This is a horrendous take. When you can get one of the better G5 tv draws on the board whose draw isn't dependent on wins/losses, you take it.
https://sicem365.com/s/13048/how-many-vi...am-attract

Based on that data, if you remove the Army-Navy game for each year, which the conference doesn’t own or get benefit from, you’re looking at an average of 1mil viewers per televised game from 2013-2021. That puts them roughly in line with SMU and ECU’s charted games on the graph and slightly below Navy. Those are good numbers, for sure, but I just don’t think they make up for the drawbacks, especially with the downward trend by losing the triple option.

This is not the slamdunk you think it is.
CBSSN is not Nielsen rated, so HALF of Army's games are not counted (Just like 4 of Navy's games are not counted each year).

But the value of Navy and Army to ESPN is demonstrated by ESPN's actual actions.

Charlotte and Temple this year are the second and third Navy AAC game on ESPN+ under the AAC contract.
ESPN televises Navy games in their grasp far more than other AAC members.
Army visits to AAC schools get ESPN coverage.

Now look at YOUR conference. Army visits to Sun Belt schools also get ESPN love. Army has MORE linear ESPN on the Sun Belt contract than I think the majority of Sun Belt schools have linear ESPN on the Sun Belt contract

It wasn’t meant to be a slam dunk? Literally said those are good numbers. Also, CBSSN probably isn’t changing the average of their top televised games for the better, since not as many people have it.

As for the linear games comparison, why would anyone be surprised by that? Army has national reach where most schools don’t. Of course they get more games put on TV.

My only point was that I don’t personally believe their TV ratings at 1mil outweigh their lackluster football and extension of the conference footprint.

The point is you can personally believe anything you want.

ESPN believes that Army has TV value.

(10-25-2023 07:46 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  What a terrible and desperate move by the AAC. You don’t get Navy or Army’s biggest game or allowing them to play as conference foes unless they both go to the championship game, which, spoiler, is never gonna happen. Sure, there’s the optics of having Army, but they aren’t boosting the conference or aiding the goal of schools becoming P5. They actually drag strength of schedule down and continue to stretch the footprint.

Completely disagree. This is an absolute home run for the AAC.

(10-25-2023 09:50 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:29 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:20 AM)slhNavy91 Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 09:11 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 08:16 AM)IWokeUpLikeThis Wrote:  This is a horrendous take. When you can get one of the better G5 tv draws on the board whose draw isn't dependent on wins/losses, you take it.
https://sicem365.com/s/13048/how-many-vi...am-attract

Based on that data, if you remove the Army-Navy game for each year, which the conference doesn’t own or get benefit from, you’re looking at an average of 1mil viewers per televised game from 2013-2021. That puts them roughly in line with SMU and ECU’s charted games on the graph and slightly below Navy. Those are good numbers, for sure, but I just don’t think they make up for the drawbacks, especially with the downward trend by losing the triple option.

This is not the slamdunk you think it is.
CBSSN is not Nielsen rated, so HALF of Army's games are not counted (Just like 4 of Navy's games are not counted each year).

But the value of Navy and Army to ESPN is demonstrated by ESPN's actual actions.

Charlotte and Temple this year are the second and third Navy AAC game on ESPN+ under the AAC contract.
ESPN televises Navy games in their grasp far more than other AAC members.
Army visits to AAC schools get ESPN coverage.

Now look at YOUR conference. Army visits to Sun Belt schools also get ESPN love. Army has MORE linear ESPN on the Sun Belt contract than I think the majority of Sun Belt schools have linear ESPN on the Sun Belt contract

It wasn’t meant to be a slam dunk? Literally said those are good numbers. Also, CBSSN probably isn’t changing the average of their top televised games for the better, since not as many people have it.

As for the linear games comparison, why would anyone be surprised by that? Army has national reach where most schools don’t. Of course they get more games put on TV.

My only point was that I don’t personally believe their TV ratings at 1mil outweigh their lackluster football and extension of the conference footprint.

The point is you can personally believe anything you went.

ESPN believes that Army has TV value.

Army most definitely has TV value - the question should be how much football value (meaning competition wise) they bring to help bring up the rankings of the conference on the field.

(10-25-2023 08:13 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(10-25-2023 07:46 AM)lelandhardy Wrote:  What a terrible and desperate move by the AAC. You don’t get Navy or Army’s biggest game or allowing them to play as conference foes unless they both go to the championship game, which, spoiler, is never gonna happen. Sure, there’s the optics of having Army, but they aren’t boosting the conference or aiding the goal of schools becoming P5. They actually drag strength of schedule down and continue to stretch the footprint.

The only thing that actually matters as far as SOS in a G5 league is having your champ in position to have a shot at the access bowl/playoff. The AAC is deplorable overall this year, and even still who cares Tulane is right there and basically if they win out and Air Force doesn't go undefeated they'll get the bid. As for Army, what they do is ensure the league ain't taking a financial hit for losing SMU. It's not a competitive upgrade, but from a "brand" perspective it's at worst break even and maybe a brand upgrade.

This is a key component. To those of us in the know, sure, Army football isn't very strong and hasn't been for a long time. But to season ticket holders with a chance to see West Point come to town? To casual fans who hear "Army joins the AAC"? Everybody knows what West Point stands for and who they are, and it turns the SMU departure from "another team leaves the AAC" to "we got ARMY".

The son of one of my buddies graduated from Smithson Valley last year. I saw him the other day, and he seemed just as excited about Gavin Woods, his classmate who went to Navy for football, as he was about the guy who went to A&M. And the first thing he said when I saw him was that they have a guy in this year's class who's going to Army. Nobody gets excited like that about a kid going to SMU (not yet anyway).