Why so the Wichita Lineman could be living on Tulsa Time!

(03-14-2024 09:41 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 12:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 11:06 AM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  Wichita State brings more than just basketball to the AAC. They field an outstanding softball program too. In my opinion, WSU's issues are internal. They just need to get their basketball program back on track. Same goes for Temple, and Tulsa. It's just unfortunate that all three are underperforming this season. The AAC can be just as good as the MWC has been this year. We just need our historically strong programs to get back to where they were, and for the strong new programs to continue to develop. Personally, I like the investment happening around the league. And in my opinion, the AAC is building to be a very dominate all-around conference (football, basketball, & academics) within the next few years.

This seems an overstatement, SSJ.

The goal of the AAC is to be the equal of the Mountain West/Pac (once Oregon State and Washington State are on board) in terms of the combination of football, basketball (men's and women's), baseball and academics.

It will be a challenge. But it is doable.

Maybe, but I think there are a number of factors that favor the AAC moving forward. I think economic conditions and the overall political environment in our states favor the AAC over the MWC. California is the hub of the MWC and that state is in decline economically and not ideal for providing politically favorable conditions for growth in this new age of NIL and the Portal. I think this is probably true of most MWC states. Student athletes want their NIL deal to have purchasing power. I think recent 2024 recruiting numbers support my hypothesis. According to 247sport, the AAC placed 7 programs inside the Top 75 for recruiting, while the MWC only had 4. Of course, one year of numbers isn't enough to claim it as a fact, but it is the earliest evidence.

I disagree about the AAC's goal. The goal is for the AAC to be better than the other non-autonomous conferences, and catch the M2. I think that is doable.

There are "stated goals" and "realistic goals," SSJoe. Nobody seriously considered AAC football as "power level."

Again, I am taking a realistic approach. If (a major "if") OSU and WSU combine with the MWC, that will be a very solid league (the MWC already as).

The AAC's realistic goal is to be equal to the MWC/Pac.

I don't foresee the AAC as currently constituted ever being year-in-and-year-out clearly better than the MWC/Pac.

(03-15-2024 07:28 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 10:52 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  If I remember correctly, WSU was added to appease UConn and avoid the MWC from inviting them. That’s what I remember the threads were about back then on this board.

It made sense back then. Strengthen the new conference in basketball with UConn as the main anchor and knock a competitor (the MWC) from getting them.

Same reason the AAC added so many Texas schools in 2021, to prevent the MWC from moving in. Seems like the AAC makes a lot of moves based on what the MWC wants to do.

Source (Chris Vannini, The Athletic): https://theathletic.com/2902904/2021/10/...y-be-next/

"By taking those six schools, the AAC prevents the Mountain West from expanding into metropolitan Texas. But the Mountain West had already decided to stick with its 12 members, a source confirmed to The Athletic (as the Action Network first reported). Indeed, sources had said in recent weeks that some people at those Texas schools preferred to join the Mountain West over the American, but the MWC opted against expansion in the end. It didn’t see financial value in adding more members.

“We’re not in desperation mode and the Mountain West was not in desperation mode” one Sun Belt source said. “The American was.”"

To say the AAC was in "desperation mode" seems a bit dramatic and overstated.

The AAC wants to be perceived nationally as an equal of the MWC in the combo of football, basketball, baseball and academics. As such, making offensive moves to pre-emptively thwart the MWC is not "desperation" (though the moves can be questioned, no doubt).

Wichita, as I have noted, has a shared-league history with various AAC members. It also has something that many AAC men's hoops programs don't have: a legit fan base. And WSU baseball has been very strong at times. Adding WSU at the time made full sense. And I, as a Memphis fan, strongly support having Wichita in the AAC (congrats to the Shockers on their win yesterday against the Tigers).

(03-14-2024 08:56 AM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  2 NCAA Appearances in 7 seasons under 3 different coaches...

Current Net Ranking 155th...
12-seed in the AAC tournament today...

WSU is not a particularly strong brand. It feels like they have declined since joining.

When you think AAC: Memphis has always been the staple. Houston and now FAU have been headliners. WSU is not ubiquitous with the AAC brand.

What was the point of adding WSU? Is the AAC better because of the addition?

It was IMO a knee-jerk reaction by AAC leadership to shore up hoops when AAC hoops underwhelmed compared to expectations the first couple of years. It was the kind of aggressive move characteristic of the "P6" initiative era, even though this was for hoops not football.

Bad decision, IMO. Didn't work, or at least hasn't worked.

Hey, they did bring a lot of posters to the AAC board.

(03-15-2024 08:29 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 07:28 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 10:52 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  If I remember correctly, WSU was added to appease UConn and avoid the MWC from inviting them. That’s what I remember the threads were about back then on this board.

It made sense back then. Strengthen the new conference in basketball with UConn as the main anchor and knock a competitor (the MWC) from getting them.

Same reason the AAC added so many Texas schools in 2021, to prevent the MWC from moving in. Seems like the AAC makes a lot of moves based on what the MWC wants to do.

Source (Chris Vannini, The Athletic): https://theathletic.com/2902904/2021/10/...y-be-next/

"By taking those six schools, the AAC prevents the Mountain West from expanding into metropolitan Texas. But the Mountain West had already decided to stick with its 12 members, a source confirmed to The Athletic (as the Action Network first reported). Indeed, sources had said in recent weeks that some people at those Texas schools preferred to join the Mountain West over the American, but the MWC opted against expansion in the end. It didn’t see financial value in adding more members.

“We’re not in desperation mode and the Mountain West was not in desperation mode” one Sun Belt source said. “The American was.”"

To say the AAC was in "desperation mode" seems a bit dramatic and overstated.

The AAC wants to be perceived nationally as an equal of the MWC in the combo of football, basketball, baseball and academics. As such, making offensive moves to pre-emptively thwart the MWC is not "desperation" (though the moves can be questioned, no doubt).

Wichita, as I have noted, has a shared-league history with various AAC members. It also has something that many AAC men's hoops programs don't have: a legit fan base. And WSU baseball has been very strong at times. Adding WSU at the time made full sense. And I, as a Memphis fan, strongly support having Wichita in the AAC (congrats to the Shockers on their win yesterday against the Tigers).

I was just quoting one of Vannini's sources, but I can see how adding 43% of your current membership in one swoop of CUSA promotions could be seen as "desperate" for long-term aspirations.

The article even states the expectation of the AAC adding 2, not 6 (either UAB + Army or UAB + Charlotte). They only reached for Texas because they started sweating over potential MWC moves.

(03-15-2024 12:04 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 08:29 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 07:28 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 10:52 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  If I remember correctly, WSU was added to appease UConn and avoid the MWC from inviting them. That’s what I remember the threads were about back then on this board.

It made sense back then. Strengthen the new conference in basketball with UConn as the main anchor and knock a competitor (the MWC) from getting them.

Same reason the AAC added so many Texas schools in 2021, to prevent the MWC from moving in. Seems like the AAC makes a lot of moves based on what the MWC wants to do.

Source (Chris Vannini, The Athletic): https://theathletic.com/2902904/2021/10/...y-be-next/

"By taking those six schools, the AAC prevents the Mountain West from expanding into metropolitan Texas. But the Mountain West had already decided to stick with its 12 members, a source confirmed to The Athletic (as the Action Network first reported). Indeed, sources had said in recent weeks that some people at those Texas schools preferred to join the Mountain West over the American, but the MWC opted against expansion in the end. It didn’t see financial value in adding more members.

“We’re not in desperation mode and the Mountain West was not in desperation mode” one Sun Belt source said. “The American was.”"

To say the AAC was in "desperation mode" seems a bit dramatic and overstated.

The AAC wants to be perceived nationally as an equal of the MWC in the combo of football, basketball, baseball and academics. As such, making offensive moves to pre-emptively thwart the MWC is not "desperation" (though the moves can be questioned, no doubt).

Wichita, as I have noted, has a shared-league history with various AAC members. It also has something that many AAC men's hoops programs don't have: a legit fan base. And WSU baseball has been very strong at times. Adding WSU at the time made full sense. And I, as a Memphis fan, strongly support having Wichita in the AAC (congrats to the Shockers on their win yesterday against the Tigers).

I was just quoting one of Vannini's sources, but I can see how adding 43% of your current membership in one swoop of CUSA promotions could be seen as "desperate" for long-term aspirations.

The article even states the expectation of the AAC adding 2, not 6 (either UAB + Army or UAB + Charlotte). They only reached for Texas because they started sweating over potential MWC moves.

As a reporter of more than 30 years or so, I can say that some sources bring an agenda when offering their thoughts. Now, that's not to suggest Vannini's source did. That source may have sincerely viewed the AAC's move as "desperate." And that would be his/her right.

To be fair, I can see how some folks would perceive the AAC moves specifically related to Texas (adding UNT, UTSA and Rice) as odd/questionable (if anything because the league already had SMU). But "desperate" simply seems exaggerated.

If the AAC had been, indeed, sweating about the MWC getting a foothold in Texas, its adding three might have been "foolish" and/or "an overreach." I can see that. But "desperate"? Just seems a term that is oddly applied in this case.

I've been very critical of the AAC for many reasons. There have been fumbles and stumbles, absurd "P6" chatter from Aresco, additions that might end up being failures, etc.

But I've never viewed the league as "desperate." Adding Wichita at the time made sense. Adding UAB and Rice made sense. UTSA and UNT offer strong potential due to sheer size and location. Charlotte brings some solid men's hoops cred. FAU ... I like that add already. The Army addition clearly was not a move made in desperation.

I respect your right to be critical of the AAC and to find off-putting its unreasonable fans. I would too, were I you.

But "desperate" seems a stretch.

(03-15-2024 01:16 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 12:04 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 08:29 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 07:28 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 10:52 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  If I remember correctly, WSU was added to appease UConn and avoid the MWC from inviting them. That’s what I remember the threads were about back then on this board.

It made sense back then. Strengthen the new conference in basketball with UConn as the main anchor and knock a competitor (the MWC) from getting them.

Same reason the AAC added so many Texas schools in 2021, to prevent the MWC from moving in. Seems like the AAC makes a lot of moves based on what the MWC wants to do.

Source (Chris Vannini, The Athletic): https://theathletic.com/2902904/2021/10/...y-be-next/

"By taking those six schools, the AAC prevents the Mountain West from expanding into metropolitan Texas. But the Mountain West had already decided to stick with its 12 members, a source confirmed to The Athletic (as the Action Network first reported). Indeed, sources had said in recent weeks that some people at those Texas schools preferred to join the Mountain West over the American, but the MWC opted against expansion in the end. It didn’t see financial value in adding more members.

“We’re not in desperation mode and the Mountain West was not in desperation mode” one Sun Belt source said. “The American was.”"

To say the AAC was in "desperation mode" seems a bit dramatic and overstated.

The AAC wants to be perceived nationally as an equal of the MWC in the combo of football, basketball, baseball and academics. As such, making offensive moves to pre-emptively thwart the MWC is not "desperation" (though the moves can be questioned, no doubt).

Wichita, as I have noted, has a shared-league history with various AAC members. It also has something that many AAC men's hoops programs don't have: a legit fan base. And WSU baseball has been very strong at times. Adding WSU at the time made full sense. And I, as a Memphis fan, strongly support having Wichita in the AAC (congrats to the Shockers on their win yesterday against the Tigers).

I was just quoting one of Vannini's sources, but I can see how adding 43% of your current membership in one swoop of CUSA promotions could be seen as "desperate" for long-term aspirations.

The article even states the expectation of the AAC adding 2, not 6 (either UAB + Army or UAB + Charlotte). They only reached for Texas because they started sweating over potential MWC moves.

As a reporter of more than 30 years or so, I can say that some sources bring an agenda when offering their thoughts. Now, that's not to suggest Vannini's source did. That source may have sincerely viewed the AAC's move as "desperate." And that would be his/her right.

To be fair, I can see how some folks would perceive the AAC moves specifically related to Texas (adding UNT, UTSA and Rice) as odd/questionable (if anything because the league already had SMU). But "desperate" simply seems exaggerated.

If the AAC had been, indeed, sweating about the MWC getting a foothold in Texas, its adding three might have been "foolish" and/or "an overreach." I can see that. But "desperate"? Just seems a term that is oddly applied in this case.

I've been very critical of the AAC for many reasons. There have been fumbles and stumbles, absurd "P6" chatter from Aresco, additions that might end up being failures, etc.

But I've never viewed the league as "desperate." Adding Wichita at the time made sense. Adding UAB and Rice made sense. UTSA and UNT offer strong potential due to sheer size and location. Charlotte brings some solid men's hoops cred. FAU ... I like that add already. The Army addition clearly was not a move made in desperation.

I respect your right to be critical of the AAC and to find off-putting its unreasonable fans. I would too, were I you.

But "desperate" seems a stretch.

My take on this is the opposite of yours. The Texas schools make perfect sense as a strategic move to keep the MWC from encroaching on AAC territory. If any school looks like the "next UCF," it's UTSA. What looked desperate, to me, was adding FAU and Charlotte.

Yes, FAU has had some on-field (and now on-court) success, but the fan base is still small and doesn't have the same growth potential that UCF and USF had. And Charlotte, despite a decent basketball history, hasn't done anything meaningful in two decades, and their football results have been lacking, to say it politely.

(03-14-2024 09:41 PM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 12:11 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-14-2024 11:06 AM)Side.Show.Joe Wrote:  Wichita State brings more than just basketball to the AAC. They field an outstanding softball program too. In my opinion, WSU's issues are internal. They just need to get their basketball program back on track. Same goes for Temple, and Tulsa. It's just unfortunate that all three are underperforming this season. The AAC can be just as good as the MWC has been this year. We just need our historically strong programs to get back to where they were, and for the strong new programs to continue to develop. Personally, I like the investment happening around the league. And in my opinion, the AAC is building to be a very dominate all-around conference (football, basketball, & academics) within the next few years.

This seems an overstatement, SSJ.

The goal of the AAC is to be the equal of the Mountain West/Pac (once Oregon State and Washington State are on board) in terms of the combination of football, basketball (men's and women's), baseball and academics.

It will be a challenge. But it is doable.

Maybe, but I think there are a number of factors that favor the AAC moving forward. I think economic conditions and the overall political environment in our states favor the AAC over the MWC. California is the hub of the MWC and that state is in decline economically and not ideal for providing politically favorable conditions for growth in this new age of NIL and the Portal. I think this is probably true of most MWC states. Student athletes want their NIL deal to have purchasing power. I think recent 2024 recruiting numbers support my hypothesis. According to 247sport, the AAC placed 7 programs inside the Top 75 for recruiting, while the MWC only had 4. Of course, one year of numbers isn't enough to claim it as a fact, but it is the earliest evidence.

I disagree about the AAC's goal. The goal is for the AAC to be better than the other non-autonomous conferences, and catch the M2. I think that is doable.

California is not in decline economically.

(03-15-2024 07:35 AM)gosports1 Wrote:  This is a great example of why conferences and fans should ask if a potential expansion candidate would still be desirable/good fit during lean times. In this case i think Wichita is. Those closer to the AAC may disagree.

Wichita State is still a good add, especially now that the AAC has expanded further into Texas.

The point was their rock solid basketball program and then their coach throttled a player.

Despite their hardcore mediocrity the past few years they've easily got the second strongest fan base in the league (#4 before the B12 trio left). The notion of kicking them out is not remotely being considered and it would be stupid to do so.

I would love to see SLU, Dayton, and VCU all join up too. I don't care about symmetry or even numbers, I care about having as many quality programs with strong foundations as possible. Some of you have always had the luxury to care about superficial things like that, but not the rest of us.

(03-15-2024 07:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Why so the Wichita Lineman could be living on Tulsa Time!

I've had this song in my head all day now and I only know the one line.

(03-14-2024 09:32 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  The real question isnt Wichita State but Temple. What is the point of Temple staying in the AAC?

(03-15-2024 03:00 PM)CitrusUCF Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 01:16 PM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 12:04 PM)Yosef181 Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 08:29 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 07:28 AM)Yosef181 Wrote:  Same reason the AAC added so many Texas schools in 2021, to prevent the MWC from moving in. Seems like the AAC makes a lot of moves based on what the MWC wants to do.

Source (Chris Vannini, The Athletic): https://theathletic.com/2902904/2021/10/...y-be-next/

"By taking those six schools, the AAC prevents the Mountain West from expanding into metropolitan Texas. But the Mountain West had already decided to stick with its 12 members, a source confirmed to The Athletic (as the Action Network first reported). Indeed, sources had said in recent weeks that some people at those Texas schools preferred to join the Mountain West over the American, but the MWC opted against expansion in the end. It didn’t see financial value in adding more members.

“We’re not in desperation mode and the Mountain West was not in desperation mode” one Sun Belt source said. “The American was.”"

To say the AAC was in "desperation mode" seems a bit dramatic and overstated.

The AAC wants to be perceived nationally as an equal of the MWC in the combo of football, basketball, baseball and academics. As such, making offensive moves to pre-emptively thwart the MWC is not "desperation" (though the moves can be questioned, no doubt).

Wichita, as I have noted, has a shared-league history with various AAC members. It also has something that many AAC men's hoops programs don't have: a legit fan base. And WSU baseball has been very strong at times. Adding WSU at the time made full sense. And I, as a Memphis fan, strongly support having Wichita in the AAC (congrats to the Shockers on their win yesterday against the Tigers).

I was just quoting one of Vannini's sources, but I can see how adding 43% of your current membership in one swoop of CUSA promotions could be seen as "desperate" for long-term aspirations.

The article even states the expectation of the AAC adding 2, not 6 (either UAB + Army or UAB + Charlotte). They only reached for Texas because they started sweating over potential MWC moves.

As a reporter of more than 30 years or so, I can say that some sources bring an agenda when offering their thoughts. Now, that's not to suggest Vannini's source did. That source may have sincerely viewed the AAC's move as "desperate." And that would be his/her right.

To be fair, I can see how some folks would perceive the AAC moves specifically related to Texas (adding UNT, UTSA and Rice) as odd/questionable (if anything because the league already had SMU). But "desperate" simply seems exaggerated.

If the AAC had been, indeed, sweating about the MWC getting a foothold in Texas, its adding three might have been "foolish" and/or "an overreach." I can see that. But "desperate"? Just seems a term that is oddly applied in this case.

I've been very critical of the AAC for many reasons. There have been fumbles and stumbles, absurd "P6" chatter from Aresco, additions that might end up being failures, etc.

But I've never viewed the league as "desperate." Adding Wichita at the time made sense. Adding UAB and Rice made sense. UTSA and UNT offer strong potential due to sheer size and location. Charlotte brings some solid men's hoops cred. FAU ... I like that add already. The Army addition clearly was not a move made in desperation.

I respect your right to be critical of the AAC and to find off-putting its unreasonable fans. I would too, were I you.

But "desperate" seems a stretch.

My take on this is the opposite of yours. The Texas schools make perfect sense as a strategic move to keep the MWC from encroaching on AAC territory. If any school looks like the "next UCF," it's UTSA. What looked desperate, to me, was adding FAU and Charlotte.

Yes, FAU has had some on-field (and now on-court) success, but the fan base is still small and doesn't have the same growth potential that UCF and USF had. And Charlotte, despite a decent basketball history, hasn't done anything meaningful in two decades, and their football results have been lacking, to say it politely.

* I did not mean to suggest that I felt adding the three Texas schools did not make sense. I simply noted I can see how some might feel that way.

* I essentially agree with you about UTSA

* The FAU addition was made, in part, to have two Florida members (which I understand). Yes, the FAU athletics growth potential may be limited, but the school has been able to lure "name" football coaches. So that's a positive.

* In many respects, Appalachian State would have been a better add than Charlotte (not sure ASU would have been interested) for a second AAC member in North Carolina. My hope is that Charlotte men's basketball can regain some of the mojo it had prior to about 2010. That has been a very solid and respectable program over the years, with lots of well-recognized coaches.

(03-15-2024 10:15 AM)Bear Catlett Wrote:  Hey, they did bring a lot of posters to the AAC board.

They actually traveled well to the 2013 F4.

They had the 4th most fans but they were not that far behind Ville, Michigan and Cuse.

It's important to highlight that if several AAC programs (at the time) weren't all underperforming at the same time, Wichita State is unlikely to be added. UConn, Memphis, Cincinnati and Temple, four of the brands viewed to consistently compete for NCAAT appearances, were all inconsistent and unable to push through a deep tournament run (this was after UConn won in 2014).

That four-team bottom of the league (UCF, USF, Tulane and ECU) were also not helping or advancing the league at this time. Wichita State was obviously open to joining an all-sports league that could have regularly been a multi-bid league.

Wichita State's promotion to the AAC has not benefited either side to date (compared to what each was previously). It'll be interesting to see if WSU remains in the AAC in the years ahead.

(03-15-2024 03:34 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 07:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Why so the Wichita Lineman could be living on Tulsa Time!

I've had this song in my head all day now and I only know the one line.

There are two songs.

(03-15-2024 04:33 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  It's important to highlight that if several AAC programs (at the time) weren't all underperforming at the same time, Wichita State is unlikely to be added. UConn, Memphis, Cincinnati and Temple, four of the brands viewed to consistently compete for NCAAT appearances, were all inconsistent and unable to push through a deep tournament run (this was after UConn won in 2014).

That four-team bottom of the league (UCF, USF, Tulane and ECU) were also not helping or advancing the league at this time. Wichita State was obviously open to joining an all-sports league that could have regularly been a multi-bid league.

Wichita State's promotion to the AAC has not benefited either side to date (compared to what each was previously). It'll be interesting to see if WSU remains in the AAC in the years ahead.

Yeah, the move was done to shore up a flagging AAC basketball performance. The league was not performing as expected and the leadership thought the solution was bringing in a good performer. The AAC was expected to perform like a quasi-Power league in hoops, like the Big East, and it wasn't happening.

Hasn't worked out for either side, and with the AAC sliding even further down the hoops pole, I doubt it ever will.

We'll see.

(03-15-2024 04:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 04:33 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  It's important to highlight that if several AAC programs (at the time) weren't all underperforming at the same time, Wichita State is unlikely to be added. UConn, Memphis, Cincinnati and Temple, four of the brands viewed to consistently compete for NCAAT appearances, were all inconsistent and unable to push through a deep tournament run (this was after UConn won in 2014).

That four-team bottom of the league (UCF, USF, Tulane and ECU) were also not helping or advancing the league at this time. Wichita State was obviously open to joining an all-sports league that could have regularly been a multi-bid league.

Wichita State's promotion to the AAC has not benefited either side to date (compared to what each was previously). It'll be interesting to see if WSU remains in the AAC in the years ahead.

Hasn't worked out for either side, and with the AAC sliding even further down the hoops pole, I doubt it ever will.

We'll see.

And now, two of the projected #1 seeds - UConn and Houston - are both former AAC members.

The plan was solid, but the timing didn't work out (or maybe the conference set up itself isn't the best))

(03-15-2024 05:15 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 04:40 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(03-15-2024 04:33 PM)GoldenWarrior11 Wrote:  It's important to highlight that if several AAC programs (at the time) weren't all underperforming at the same time, Wichita State is unlikely to be added. UConn, Memphis, Cincinnati and Temple, four of the brands viewed to consistently compete for NCAAT appearances, were all inconsistent and unable to push through a deep tournament run (this was after UConn won in 2014).

That four-team bottom of the league (UCF, USF, Tulane and ECU) were also not helping or advancing the league at this time. Wichita State was obviously open to joining an all-sports league that could have regularly been a multi-bid league.

Wichita State's promotion to the AAC has not benefited either side to date (compared to what each was previously). It'll be interesting to see if WSU remains in the AAC in the years ahead.

Hasn't worked out for either side, and with the AAC sliding even further down the hoops pole, I doubt it ever will.

We'll see.

And now, two of the projected #1 seeds - UConn and Houston - are both former AAC members.

The plan was solid, but the timing didn't work out (or maybe the conference set up itself isn't the best))

I think the set up is a key thing. IMO the AAC has never come close to "gelling" as a hoops conference. There has never been any synergy, in fact I'd say the opposite, it has performed as less than the sum of its parts. The wacky geography is likely a factor. And the top programs - Memphis, Houston, Cincy, UConn, Temple - while each have very fine legacies, they also have/had very different hoops cultures.

It has had much better football synergy. The crazy geography isn't nearly as much an issue when it's just a handful of road games each team is playing.